INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Burma: United Nations

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what information his Department has on reports that six UN Development Programme staff in Burma have been involved in corruption.

Shahid Malik: UN Development Programme (UNDP) has recently taken disciplinary action against four UNDP staff in Burma for unsatisfactory performance or for inappropriate use of project resources, totalling about £125.

Departments: Accountancy

Oliver Letwin: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what accounts directions were issued by his Department in financial years  (a) 2005-06 and  (b) 2006-07.

Douglas Alexander: HM Treasury issue accounts directions to Departments, pension schemes and agencies (under the Government Resource and Accounts Act 2000) and to trading funds (under the Government Trading Fund Act 1973).
	For the years 2005-06 and 2006-07 the Department for International Development did not issue any accounts directions for the form and content of resource and other accounts to any of the Department's sponsored bodies.

Departments: Consultants

Mark Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development which private consultancy firms  (a) his Department and  (b) agencies which report to his Department engaged in each of the last three years; which programmes or projects each firm worked on; and what the approximate cost to the Department or agency concerned was of each engagement.

Douglas Alexander: The information requested is available on the DFID website http://www.dfid.gov.uk/procurement/contractslet.asp for the calendar years 2005, 2006 and up to and including September 2007. Providing the same level of information for 2004 would incur disproportionate cost. The information on our website does not include low value contracts issued by DFID's overseas offices and would also incur disproportionate cost to compile.

Departments: Public Expenditure

Oliver Letwin: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development if he will break down in  (a) near cash and  (b) non-cash terms columns 1 to 8 of the subhead detail tables for his Department contained in the (i) main estimate, (ii) winter supplementary estimate and (iii) spring supplementary estimate for financial years 2001-02 to 2007-08.

Douglas Alexander: The information in the Part II: Subhead detail table of our Supply Estimates is not broken down by near-cash/non-cash. There are no other published documents that provide a near-cash/non-cash breakdown of this data, though the Public Expenditure Statistical Analyses (PESA) publication (copies of which are in the House Library) provides a useful near-cash/non-cash DEL split (see Tables 1.6, 1.7 and 2.1 of PESA 2007 for data for years 2001-02 to 2007-08).
	Data taken from Supply Estimates is not necessarily readily compatible with a near-cash/non-cash split, which is used only within the Departmental Expenditure Limit budgetary controls applied by HM Treasury. Providing a near-cash/non-cash split against the columns in the Part II: Subhead detail table in our Estimate would only be possible at disproportionate cost. The ability of Departments to provide such a split will depend partly on the extent of reconciliations between voted provision and budgetary limits.

Developing Countries: Politics and Government

James Duddridge: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development how many applications he received for the Governance and Transparency Fund; and whether he plans to publish a list of  (a) successful and  (b) unsuccessful applications.

Shahid Malik: The deadline for proposals to the Governance and Transparency Fund (GTF) was midnight on 28 September 2007. We received 265 proposals by this deadline.
	We aim to make final funding decisions in December 2007. In accordance with normal practice for our central funding schemes, we will post a full list of successful proposals on the DFID website once all applicants have been informed of the decisions. The question of whether or not to publish the names of unsuccessful applicants, bearing in mind the need to balance respect for confidentiality with a desire to be as open as possible, raises a number of issues; we are currently considering these.

Overseas Aid

Oliver Letwin: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what his Department's  (a) administrative expenditure,  (b) other current expenditure,  (c) grant expenditure,  (d) operating appropriations in aid (A in A),  (e) capital and  (f) non-operating A in A outturn, broken down in (i) near cash and (ii) non-cash terms, was for financial years 2001-02 to 2006-07.

Douglas Alexander: The Part II: Subhead detail table in Main Estimates for each year provide outturn data for one prior year, but these are only broken down to net total resources for each section in the table.
	There are no other published documents that provide a near-cash/non-cash breakdown of these data, though the Public Expenditure Statistical Analyses (PESA) publication (copies of which are in the House Library) provides a useful near-cash/non-cash DEL split (see Tables 1.6, 1.7 and 2.1 of PESA 2007 for data for years 2001-02 to 2007-08). However, we have been able to provide a near-cash/non-cash split against the columns in the Part II: Subhead detail table in our Estimate by identifying non-cash items (cost of capital charges, depreciation, new/adjusted provisions, notional audit fees and other notional charges, losses on disposal of fixed assets) shown in the notes to our Resource Accounts. All other items are near cash. The Resource Accounts do not split non-cash items between 'Other current expenditure' and 'Grants', therefore all non-cash programme items have been allocated to 'Other Current Expenditure' in the following table.
	Data taken from Supply Estimates or resource accounts are not necessarily readily compatible with a near-cash/non-cash split, which is used only within the Departmental Expenditure Limit budgetary controls applied by HM Treasury.
	
		
			  £000 
			Administrative expenditure  Other current expenditure  Grant expenditure  Operating A in A  Capital  Non-operating A in A 
			 2001-02 Near cash 71,760 12,275 2,212,501 8,807 70,587 51,095 
			  Non cash 13,936 178,313 — — — — 
			 2002-03 Near cash 38,611 44,919 2,548,925 12,141 56,120 39,093 
			  Non cash 59,534 194,713 — — — — 
			 2003-04 Near cash 169,030 38,707 2,589,812 5,499 68,120 40,777 
			  Non cash 31,525 50,344 — — — — 
			 2004-05 Near cash 190,624 17,905 2,933,229 6,546 820,926 32,972 
			  Non cash 26,964 130,216 — — — — 
			 2005-06 Near cash 201,720 483,685 3,066,508 18,690 52,424 34,145 
			  Non cash 25,132 131,828 — — — — 
			 2006-07 Near cash 197,559 508,616 3,496,403 10,829 29,333 35,320 
			  Non cash 50,892 460,968 — — — —

Overseas Aid: Water

Lyn Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development 
	(1)  what assistance his Department is providing to aid the development of water operator partnerships;
	(2)  what assessment he has made of the potential value of water operator partnerships.

Gareth Thomas: DFID officials have been in discussion with NGOs such as Oxfam, WDM, WaterAid and others for over a year about more effective ways to support public utilities. We recognise that promoting partnerships is an opportunity to help water utilities identify what works, build their capacity and support them to deliver better services to poor people.
	In April of this year, DFID funded regional workshops in Asia and Africa. Working with utility managers, these explored the possibilities of establishing regional partnerships—and examined the support they might need. We have also agreed to fund work to share the lessons from public water utilities about what has worked best in individual countries and we will look to see what can be learnt from partnerships between utilities.

BUSINESS, ENTERPRISE AND REGULATORY REFORM

Broadband

John Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform what assessment he has made of the effect of retail price competition through the application of regulation in broadband on the range and price of services available to consumers; and what assessment he has made of the merits of applying similar openness of access to the market for premium content and pay TV.

Stephen Timms: The matter raised is the responsibility of the independent regulator, the Office of Communications (Ofcom), which is accountable to Parliament rather than Minister. Accordingly, I have asked the chief executive of Ofcom to reply directly to the hon. Member. Copies of the chief executive's letter will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

Companies: Takeovers

Graham Brady: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform if he will review the takeover code in the light of the instability at Northern Rock.

Stephen Timms: The takeover code is issued and administered by the takeover panel, which operates independently from Government. Changes to the code, if considered necessary, would be made by the panel. The code ensures that shareholders' interests are protected during the course of a takeover bid.

Departments: Early Retirement

Brian Jenkins: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform how many and what proportion of staff in his Department and its predecessor took early retirement in the last five years, broken down by grade; and at what cost.

Gareth Thomas: A total of 473 staff in the former Department of Trade and Industry took early retirement at age over 50 from April 2002 to March 2007 at a total cost of £15.34 million, broken down as follows:
	
		
			   Number of early retirements  Cost of lump sums (£)  Proportion of depart staff including UKTI (percentage) 
			 2002-03 19 704,188.73 0.4 
			 2003-04 12 566,127.20 0.3 
			 2004-05 271 6,962,183.32 6 
			 2005-06 113 4,934,923.32 3 
			 2006-07 58 2,172,697.92 2 
			 
			 Total 473 15,340,120.49  
		
	
	A breakdown of the grade for this number of staff could only be established at a disproportionate cost.

Public Holidays

Andrew MacKinlay: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform what measures have been taken to ensure that  (a) employers and  (b) employees are aware of the changes in statutory holiday entitlements and what the statutory holiday entitlements are, and during what dates, during the transitional period of their introduction.

Patrick McFadden: The Government undertook two full consultations on the proposals to increase the holiday entitlement, holding a number of regional meetings and working closely with unions and employer organisations. Specific efforts were made to engage small businesses and employers in key sectors likely to be particularly affected. The ability to receive email updates on the proposals was offered and over eight thousand people requested updates on progress. The proposals also attracted considerable media coverage on a number of occasions.
	Detailed guidance for employers and workers, including an interactive calculator for holiday entitlements, has been placed on the Business Link and Direct.gov websites respectively, with supporting material on BERR's own website.

NORTHERN IRELAND

Departments: Flowers

Mark Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how much was spent by his Department on flowers in the last 12 months.

Shaun Woodward: The Northern Ireland Office, excluding its agencies and Executive NDPBs, spent £21,102 on flowers in 2006-07 (this is the last 12 months for which audited expenditure figures are available).

WALES

Lone Parents

Andrew MacKay: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what estimate he has made of the number of lone parents with children aged between five and 16 years in Wales he expects to move into work as a result of the Government's proposed changes to the benefit regime.

Peter Hain: The UK Government's goal is to increase the number of working lone parents in the UK by 300,000.

Rail Services

Betty Williams: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what discussions he has had with the First Minister and the Secretary of State for Transport on railway services in Wales.

Huw Irranca-Davies: My right hon. Friend and I regularly meet with ministerial colleagues both in Whitehall and the Assembly Government to discuss issues affecting Wales, including rail services.

Clean Coal

Philip Hollobone: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what assessment he has made of the future for clean coal in Wales; and if he will make a statement.

Peter Hain: Clean coal is central to our goal of developing a diverse energy supply in Wales, which dramatically reduces our carbon emissions.

Animal Health Measures

Mark Harper: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs on the cross-border variations in emergency animal health measures.

Huw Irranca-Davies: The Secretary of State and I have regular discussions with the Secretary of State for DEFRA on a range of issues, including animal health measures.
	The recent crises in animal health and our Government's reaction prove the seriousness with which we take these issues, and that the procedures in place to deal with such sudden events are working well.

Heroin

Stephen Crabb: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales when he last discussed the average street price of heroin in Wales with the Home Secretary.

Huw Irranca-Davies: Both my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and I have regular discussions with ministerial colleagues on matters affecting Wales including such matters as drug-related crime.

RAF St. Athan

Mark Pritchard: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what progress has been made on infrastructure projects in support of the Defence Training Review project at RAF St. Athan; and if he will make a statement.

Peter Hain: Negotiations between the Ministry of Defence, the Welsh Assembly Government and Metrix are continuing on delivering Package 1 quickly, and in addressing the remaining affordability issues to deliver Package 2.
	On 3 October the Welsh Assembly Government announced that public exhibitions are under way on obtaining the public's views on improving access to Cardiff airport, demonstrating their commitment to improving the road infrastructure to the airport and which will no doubt also benefit the DTR at St. Athan.

CHILDREN, SCHOOLS AND FAMILIES

Schools: Crimes of Violence

David Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many assaults there were on school teachers in 2005-06 which led to exclusions, broken down by  (a) by category of assault and  (b) local education authority; and if he will make a statement.

Kevin Brennan: Information on the number of assaults on school teachers is not collected centrally.
	The Department does collect information on the number of permanent and fixed period exclusions from schools due to physical assault against an adult. The latest information is shown in the following tables.
	However, due to underlying changes in the data collection, information on the reasons for exclusion is only available for maintained secondary schools for 2005-06.
	
		
			  Maintained secondary schools( 1, 2) : number of fixed period exclusi ons by reason of exclusion 2005- 06 by local authority area 
			Number of fixed period exclusions 
			Physical assault against a pupil  Physical assault against an adult  Verbal abuse/ threatening behaviour against a pupil  Verbal abuse/ threatening behaviour against an adult  Bullying  Racist abuse  Sexual misconduct 
			   England( 3) 62,670 8,240 12,730 79,370 5,270 3,370 2,620 
			  
			   North East( 3) 2,650 370 590 3,560 230 130 110 
			 841 Darlington 165 27 65 294 (5)— 9 6 
			 840 Durham 644 62 109 864 45 14 15 
			 390 Gateshead 68 3 13 113 22 5 0 
			 805 Hartlepool 62 9 44 133 14 7 6 
			 806 Middlesbrough 127 22 26 188 15 9 7 
			 391 Newcastle upon Tyne 292 58 42 393 27 9 16 
			 392 North Tyneside 176 21 44 229 19 14 13 
			 929 Northumberland 453 53 74 468 26 15 16 
			 807 Redcar and Cleveland 144 22 30 152 9 4 5 
			 393 South Tyneside 164 21 55 232 19 19 13 
			 808 Stockton-on-Tees 148 30 47 292 13 5 11 
			 394 Sunderland 211 43 39 206 16 16 (5)— 
			  
			   North West( 3, 4) 8,480 1,240 1,780 11,730 700 490 380 
			 889 Blackburn with Darwen 195 36 26 226 11 19 9 
			 890 Blackpool 233 42 51 221 7 6 7 
			 350 Bolton 410 77 87 630 22 30 23 
			 351 Bury(4) 334 24 105 369 45 15 13 
			 875 Cheshire 980 85 221 1,335 41 31 31 
			 909 Cumbria 659 69 165 943 61 27 31 
			 876 Halton 110 25 24 186 13 (5)— 11 
			 340 Knowsley 116 23 26 169 11 12 9 
			 888 Lancashire 1,357 158 213 1,688 106 78 59 
			 341 Liverpool 301 44 50 269 31 28 4 
			 352 Manchester 753 229 164 1,009 70 38 43 
			 353 Oldham 264 48 66 435 10 37 12 
			 354 Rochdale 287 29 43 289 51 17 13 
			 355 Salford 261 52 39 400 16 17 12 
			 343 Sefton 73 23 29 115 11 13 17 
			 342 St. Helens 114 37 36 287 11 3 4 
			 356 Stockport 425 55 77 650 35 28 12 
			 357 Tameside 408 40 68 555 38 28 7 
			 358 Trafford 200 27 55 302 12 18 11 
			 877 Warrington 218 24 61 516 5 16 8 
			 359 Wigan 324 48 101 563 28 9 17 
			 344 Wirral 462 46 74 575 60 20 29 
			  
			   Yorkshire and the Humber 7,430 1,140 1,450 10,280 550 460 330 
			 370 Barnsley 207 22 29 250 15 11 9 
			 380 Bradford 860 159 120 1,091 54 73 50 
			 381 Calderdale 356 45 61 381 25 31 13 
			 371 Doncaster 386 50 78 708 21 18 20 
			 811 East Riding of Yorkshire 543 77 123 750 24 19 26 
			 810 Kingston Upon Hull, City of 389 123 60 716 27 40 12 
			 382 Kirklees 558 90 134 862 39 26 11 
			 383 Leeds 1,043 200 160 1,470 91 76 44 
			 812 North East Lincolnshire 265 47 51 360 29 9 19 
			 813 North Lincolnshire 282 31 30 309 24 12 8 
			 815 North Yorkshire 494 86 132 952 48 27 34 
			 372 Rotherham 434 35 152 576 24 25 14 
			 373 Sheffield 841 86 173 862 77 40 26 
			 384 Wakefield 607 55 97 776 34 42 33 
			 816 York 162 30 45 214 13 10 9 
			  
			   East Midlands( 3) 5,290 750 970 6,500 520 250 200 
			 831 Derby 179 37 45 248 41 20 10 
			 830 Derbyshire 684 76 74 845 76 32 18 
			 856 Leicester 502 70 108 560 41 15 20 
			 855 Leicestershire 755 83 166 1,054 72 40 31 
			 925 Lincolnshire 625 78 136 695 62 38 34 
			 928 Northamptonshire 1,114 134 195 1,423 73 46 39 
			 892 Nottingham 379 109 71 355 40 13 17 
			 891 Nottinghamshire 1,034 159 167 1,299 107 47 35 
			 857 Rutland 13 4 8 20 9 (5)— 0 
			  
			   West Midlands( 3) 7,060 890 1,230 8,080 650 410 290 
			 330 Birmingham 1,733 214 213 1,216 176 99 68 
			 331 Coventry 383 63 82 433 46 21 9 
			 332 Dudley 482 41 114 626 56 31 38 
			 884 Herefordshire 170 15 33 274 3 4 4 
			 333 Sandwell 351 77 73 378 28 23 12 
			 893 Shropshire 320 36 43 372 47 9 11 
			 334 Staffordshire 282 29 69 301 13 23 14 
			 860 Solihull 967 72 221 1,325 80 31 17 
			 861 Stoke-on-Trent 362 56 57 409 25 52 17 
			 894 Telford and Wrekin 348 50 55 512 21 4 17 
			 335 Walsall 334 52 40 335 21 22 10 
			 937 Warwickshire 528 45 109 806 51 49 24 
			 336 Wolverhampton 296 56 34 358 35 17 23 
			 885 Worcestershire 506 87 88 734 45 25 22 
			  
			   East of England( 3) 6,250 700 1,360 8,930 540 430 290 
			 820 Bedfordshire 372 67 101 611 45 33 13 
			 873 Cambridgeshire 477 36 110 559 63 30 24 
			 881 Essex 2,022 211 388 2,807 135 116 77 
			 919 Hertfordshire 929 109 293 1,326 95 97 62 
			 821 Luton 249 48 36 303 14 16 10 
			 926 Norfolk 649 65 92 1,194 67 48 51 
			 874 Peterborough 377 21 84 308 28 25 14 
			 882 Southend-on-Sea 126 19 55 227 8 6 10 
			 935 Suffolk 822 111 170 1,216 74 31 16 
			 883 Thurrock 230 16 30 379 13 31 12 
			  
			   London( 3, 4) 8,630 1,260 1,630 6,920 770 350 400 
			   Inner London( 3, 4) 2,850 500 490 1,900 230 70 110 
			 202 Camden(4) 190 41 50 175 9 9 7 
			 201 City of London 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 204 Hackney 290 42 39 134 16 4 (5)— 
			 205 Hammersmith and Fulham 77 7 9 30 4 0 3 
			 309 Haringey 288 55 32 198 8 0 21 
			 206 Islington 151 32 28 109 27 5 3 
			 207 Kensington and Chelsea 49 15 18 44 5 (5)— 0 
			 208 Lambeth 236 20 38 145 15 (5)— 6 
			 209 Lewisham 362 62 54 231 30 11 13 
			 316 Newham 516 84 78 277 50 10 26 
			 210 Southwark 166 28 57 113 14 (5)— 6 
			 211 Tower Hamlets 192 56 34 183 31 9 4 
			 212 Wandsworth 186 24 25 144 10 (5)— 6 
			 213 Westminster 142 35 25 118 11 14 9 
			  
			   Outer London( 3) 5,790 760 1,140 5,020 540 280 300 
			 301 Barking and Dagenham 113 31 21 162 (5)— 3 15 
			 302 Barnet 424 50 64 227 17 18 36 
			 303 Bexley 404 41 71 373 18 16 16 
			 304 Brent 518 81 63 314 64 13 5 
			 305 Bromley 170 20 43 166 7 11 18 
			 306 Croydon 248 44 63 171 21 5 19 
			 307 Ealing 326 15 72 243 52 37 9 
			 308 Enfield 442 72 121 374 35 16 41 
			 203 Greenwich 537 50 140 577 50 32 30 
			 310 Harrow 319 27 65 206 23 10 10 
			 311 Havering 219 23 37 170 33 29 15 
			 312 Hillingdon 192 34 34 258 27 22 13 
			 313 Hounslow 258 33 50 256 29 6 11 
			 314 Kingston upon Thames 115 10 24 136 5 4 (5)— 
			 315 Merton 236 49 33 191 12 5 4 
			 317 Redbridge 332 25 71 258 30 10 12 
			 318 Richmond upon Thames 131 25 45 223 18 6 11 
			 319 Sutton 289 26 58 263 40 25 11 
			 320 Waltham Forest 514 106 69 448 61 13 21 
			  
			   South East( 3) 10,630 1,170 2,330 14,220 840 610 350 
			 867 Bracknell Forest 136 15 11 168 5 5 5 
			 846 Brighton and Hove 316 41 73 579 25 18 19 
			 825 Buckinghamshire 490 32 74 465 30 35 19 
			 845 East Sussex 793 72 161 1,201 35 36 15 
			 850 Hampshire 1,748 211 430 2,420 148 89 65 
			 921 Isle of Wight 126 25 43 292 8 8 7 
			 886 Kent 1,913 179 360 2,000 172 116 60 
			 887 Medway 555 53 117 608 28 36 29 
			 826 Milton Keynes 215 23 35 234 22 10 0 
			 931 Oxfordshire 614 93 121 1,186 50 43 23 
			 851 Portsmouth 451 30 74 406 17 22 (5)— 
			 870 Reading 83 14 56 134 7 3 0 
			 871 Slough 89 16 17 36 12 3 8 
			 852 Southampton 538 88 84 741 41 13 11 
			 936 Surrey 1,248 101 334 1,682 144 100 45 
			 869 West Berkshire 156 20 55 227 17 4 3 
			 938 West Sussex 921 120 239 1,458 63 53 20 
			 868 Windsor and Maidenhead 113 10 18 150 10 6 5 
			 872 Wokingham 122 27 27 229 10 6 11 
			  
			   South West( 3) 6,240 710 1,400 9,160 480 240 270 
			 800 Bath and North East Somerset 228 21 70 297 28 9 5 
			 837 Bournemouth 147 25 21 196 3 12 0 
			 801 Bristol, City of 627 110 91 741 43 18 20 
			 908 Cornwall 435 42 105 609 44 23 23 
			 878 Devon 1,022 109 244 1,768 84 27 32 
			 835 Dorset 387 24 75 358 14 12 15 
			 916 Gloucestershire 651 45 182 896 37 22 38 
			 420 Isles of Scilly 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 802 North Somerset 255 18 60 231 26 7 4 
			 879 Plymouth 254 34 26 362 13 12 18 
			 836 Poole 151 17 38 492 3 (5)— 5 
			 933 Somerset 734 104 185 1,464 48 19 42 
			 803 South Gloucestershire 315 30 89 533 39 20 10 
			 866 Swindon 281 40 51 265 21 14 18 
			 880 Torbay 193 23 34 251 19 7 (5)— 
			 865 Wiltshire 561 67 127 695 57 37 37 
		
	
	
		
			Drug and alcohol related  Damage  Theft  Persistent disruptive behaviour  Other  Total( 3) 
			   England( 3) 8,360 9,390 7,770 72,340 71,720 343,840 
			 
			   North East( 3) 340 360 250 3,360 2,950 14,910 
			 841 Darlington 30 33 18 608 248 1,510 
			 840 Durham 87 78 58 771 955 3,700 
			 390 Gateshead 10 3 4 56 144 440 
			 805 Hartlepool 10 19 18 101 47 470 
			 806 Middlesbrough 8 32 14 243 107 800 
			 391 Newcastle upon Tyne 20 39 23 310 203 1,430 
			 392 North Tyneside 18 24 26 126 137 850 
			 929 Northumberland 77 42 35 537 323 2,120 
			 807 Redcar and Cleveland 11 28 14 168 167 750 
			 393 South Tyneside 26 19 18 141 239 970 
			 808 Stockton-on-Tees 28 24 17 159 96 870 
			 394 Sunderland 12 23 8 144 285 1,000 
			 
			   North West( 3, 4) 1,470 1,310 1,020 10,580 10,460 49,640 
			 889 Blackburn with Darwen 19 18 18 150 93 820 
			 890 Blackpool 35 16 14 271 70 970 
			 350 Bolton 36 85 46 856 172 2,470 
			 351 Bury(4) 58 44 33 459 201 1,700 
			 875 Cheshire 266 139 117 956 559 4,760 
			 909 Cumbria 87 96 94 995 1,270 4,500 
			 876 Halton 30 22 12 159 30 620 
			 340 Knowsley 15 19 10 111 191 710 
			 888 Lancashire 227 169 164 1,330 1,493 7,040 
			 341 Liverpool 34 81 22 378 746 1,990 
			 352 Manchester 96 152 99 859 971 4,480 
			 353 Oldham 60 31 34 231 921 2,150 
			 354 Rochdale 33 48 43 315 428 1,600 
			 355 Salford 43 38 23 463 51 1,420 
			 343 Sefton 21 6 22 86 168 580 
			 342 St. Helens 31 32 16 199 295 1,070 
			 356 Stockport 73 68 52 525 539 2,540 
			 357 Tameside 61 54 35 459 432 2,190 
			 358 Trafford 34 27 26 126 358 1,200 
			 877 Warrington 52 45 27 275 325 1,570 
			 359 Wigan 60 39 49 807 555 2,600 
			 344 Wirral 100 77 64 565 593 2,670 
			 
			   Yorkshire and the Humber 990 1,190 760 10,700 6,790 42,050 
			 370 Barnsley 28 35 21 201 222 1,050 
			 380 Bradford 104 93 104 797 726 4,230 
			 381 Calderdale 90 49 29 297 380 1,760 
			 371 Doncaster 38 64 27 633 528 2,570 
			 811 East Riding of Yorkshire 70 92 57 847 457 3,090 
			 810 Kingston Upon Hull, City of 26 87 22 619 247 2,370 
			 382 Kirklees 55 76 71 688 819 3,430 
			 383 Leeds 141 155 153 1,595 942 6,070 
			 812 North East Lincolnshire 13 51 13 478 634 1,970 
			 813 North Lincolnshire 76 45 20 430 121 1,390 
			 815 North Yorkshire 150 129 72 1,032 106 3,260 
			 372 Rotherham 23 69 17 405 344 2,120 
			 373 Sheffield 72 98 37 1,088 714 4,110 
			 384 Wakefield 67 114 68 1,298 433 3,620 
			 816 York 38 28 48 295 118 1,010 
			 
			   East Midlands( 3) 670 770 550 6,050 5,920 28,440 
			 831 Derby 21 29 20 324 289 1,260 
			 830 Derbyshire 82 92 73 516 1,468 4,040 
			 856 Leicester 55 113 44 413 425 2,370 
			 855 Leicestershire 112 128 93 1,242 497 4,270 
			 925 Lincolnshire 84 74 79 647 373 2,930 
			 928 Northamptonshire 155 149 119 1,338 999 5,780 
			 892 Nottingham 38 43 32 446 248 1,790 
			 891 Nottinghamshire 120 136 87 1,112 1,616 5,920 
			 857 Rutland 6 (5)— 4 13 7 90 
			 
			   West Midlands( 3) 690 1,160 780 6,450 8,700 36,390 
			 330 Birmingham 122 256 201 1,213 3,230 8,740 
			 331 Coventry 45 81 47 413 783 2,410 
			 332 Dudley 35 91 49 564 718 2,850 
			 884 Herefordshire 15 23 24 93 306 960 
			 333 Sandwell 38 80 54 367 356 1,840 
			 893 Shropshire 43 35 40 242 487 1,690 
			 334 Staffordshire 10 86 41 312 241 1,420 
			 860 Solihull 98 118 80 885 773 4,670 
			 861 Stoke-on-Trent 9 46 36 292 277 1,640 
			 894 Telford and Wrekin 46 49 17 412 292 1,820 
			 335 Walsall 16 56 16 302 133 1,340 
			 937 Warwickshire 117 89 68 469 545 2,900 
			 336 Wolverhampton 29 47 36 233 287 1,450 
			 885 Worcestershire 66 107 71 653 267 2,670 
			 
			   East of England( 3) 1,130 960 870 7,690 7,750 36,920 
			 820 Bedfordshire 66 77 43 552 424 2,400 
			 873 Cambridgeshire 119 73 87 503 624 2,710 
			 881 Essex 356 287 246 2,531 2,787 11,960 
			 919 Hertfordshire 271 189 211 1,250 1,217 6,050 
			 821 Luton 17 22 40 207 302 1,260 
			 926 Norfolk 110 89 44 662 661 3,730 
			 874 Peterborough 49 46 48 384 124 1,510 
			 882 Southend-on-Sea 22 20 29 125 273 920 
			 935 Suffolk 100 117 97 1,187 824 4,770 
			 883 Thurrock 16 43 29 292 517 1,610 
			 
			   London( 3, 4) 680 1,100 1,470 6,070 9,310 38,600 
			   Inner London( 3, 4) 160 260 380 1,780 2,740 11,460 
			 202 Camden(4) 28 30 33 130 118 820 
			 201 City of London 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 204 Hackney 12 24 15 151 103 830 
			 205 Hammersmith and Fulham 12 6 23 48 69 290 
			 309 Haringey 15 34 42 217 338 1,250 
			 206 Islington 12 8 12 51 91 530 
			 207 Kensington and Chelsea 6 17 16 98 84 350 
			 208 Lambeth 9 18 28 120 370 1,010 
			 209 Lewisham 3 46 42 249 242 1,350 
			 316 Newham 15 18 67 292 506 1,940 
			 210 Southwark 12 12 19 149 143 720 
			 211 Tower Hamlets 10 28 31 75 233 890 
			 212 Wandsworth 15 7 26 105 304 850 
			 213 Westminster 8 14 26 92 143 640 
			 
			   Outer London( 3) 530 840 1,090 4,290 6,570 27,140 
			 301 Barking and Dagenham 4 29 25 160 86 650 
			 302 Barnet 39 25 115 231 517 1,760 
			 303 Bexley 32 82 49 150 410 1,660 
			 304 Brent 16 40 55 331 254 1,750 
			 305 Bromley 14 21 33 93 330 930 
			 306 Croydon 30 32 55 216 81 990 
			 307 Ealing 55 80 69 274 788 2,020 
			 308 Enfield 39 55 105 396 250 1,950 
			 203 Greenwich 52 65 52 482 406 2,470 
			 310 Harrow 4 30 77 147 251 1,170 
			 311 Havering 20 38 41 104 508 1,240 
			 312 Hillingdon 27 70 46 192 724 1,640 
			 313 Hounslow 27 38 55 159 258 1,180 
			 314 Kingston upon Thames 8 22 29 77 115 550 
			 315 Merton 31 45 28 158 256 1,050 
			 317 Redbridge 30 48 65 206 475 1,560 
			 318 Richmond upon Thames 23 20 37 143 35 720 
			 319 Sutton 17 30 84 328 212 1,380 
			 320 Waltham Forest 58 68 68 441 613 2,480 
			 
			   South East( 3) 1,380 1,450 1,370 13,240 12,690 60,260 
			 867 Bracknell Forest 15 16 12 153 60 600 
			 846 Brighton and Hove 49 46 38 552 244 2,000 
			 825 Buckinghamshire 65 75 102 273 600 2,260 
			 845 East Sussex 92 105 106 1,055 1,516 5,190 
			 850 Hampshire 273 195 249 2,516 1,162 9,510 
			 921 Isle of Wight 42 17 10 212 364 1,150 
			 886 Kent 126 259 195 1,798 3,327 10,510 
			 887 Medway 32 72 28 1,036 349 2,940 
			 826 Milton Keynes 45 27 45 208 210 1,070 
			 931 Oxfordshire 159 114 85 838 306 3,630 
			 851 Portsmouth 56 37 28 408 558 2,090 
			 870 Reading 14 11 9 116 80 530 
			 871 Slough 4 22 11 38 190 450 
			 852 Southampton 28 62 45 520 341 2,510 
			 936 Surrey 187 186 219 1,398 2,357 8,000 
			 869 West Berkshire 37 35 16 280 285 1,140 
			 938 West Sussex 126 125 119 1,500 483 5,230 
			 868 Windsor and Maidenhead 15 20 16 116 137 620 
			 872 Wokingham 19 22 37 218 117 850 
			 
			   South West( 3) 1,010 1,090 690 8,200 7,150 36,630 
			 800 Bath and North East Somerset 40 32 33 228 153 1,140 
			 837 Bournemouth 28 12 25 140 118 730 
			 801 Bristol, City of 52 135 35 730 740 3,340 
			 908 Cornwall 77 54 37 372 726 2,550 
			 878 Devon 166 143 125 1,259 1,764 6,740 
			 835 Dorset 60 64 71 378 496 1,950 
			 916 Gloucestershire 85 104 104 873 1,058 4,100 
			 420 Isles of Scilly 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 802 North Somerset 51 48 20 110 325 1,160 
			 879 Plymouth 61 36 21 232 118 1,190 
			 836 Poole 33 32 25 538 74 1,410 
			 933 Somerset 142 130 55 1,264 133 4,320 
			 803 South Gloucestershire 38 68 55 324 644 2,170 
			 866 Swindon 12 68 16 440 479 1,710 
			 880 Torbay 28 57 10 243 96 960 
			 865 Wiltshire 137 110 59 1,068 221 3,180 
			 (1) Includes middle schools as deemed. (2) Excludes non-maintained special schools. (3) Totals for England, each region and across all reasons for exclusion have been rounded to the nearest 10. (4) There were four fixed period exclusions in Camden and Bury local authorities for which reason for exclusion has not been established. These have been included in the total column only. (5) One or two exclusions.  Source: School Census 
		
	
	
		
			  Maintained secondary schools( 1, 2) : number of permanent exclusions by reason of exclusion (estimates)( 3)  2005-06 by local authority area 
			Number of fixed period exclusions 
			Physical assault against a pupil  Physical assault against an adult  Verbal abuse/ threatening behaviour against a pupil  Verbal abuse/ threatening behaviour against an adult  Bullying  Racist abuse  Sexual misconduct 
			   England( 4) 1,260 740 330 900 80 30 110 
			  
			   North East( 4) 60 50 10 60 (7)— (7)— (7)— 
			 841 Darlington 6 5 (6)— 9 0 0 0 
			 840 Durham 10 7 4 15 0 0 0 
			 390 Gateshead 3 5 (6)— 6 0 0 0 
			 805 Hartlepool 6 (6)— (6)— 3 0 (6)— 0 
			 806 Middlesbrough (6)— (6)— 0 (6)— 0 0 (6)— 
			 391 Newcastle upon Tyne 7 13 0 5 0 0 0 
			 392 North Tyneside (6)— 0 (6)— (6)— 0 0 0 
			 929 Northumberland 15 10 (6)— 8 (6)— 0 0 
			 807 Redcar and Cleveland 3 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 0 0 
			 393 South Tyneside 3 4 0 (6)— 0 0 0 
			 808 Stockton-on-Tees (6)— (6)— 0 5 0 0 (6)— 
			 394 Sunderland 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 0 0 
			  
			   North West( 4,5) 170 120 40 140 10 (7)— 10 
			 889 Blackburn with Darwen 6 3 0 7 0 0 0 
			 890 Blackpool 9 9 (6)— 3 0 0 (6)— 
			 350 Bolton 6 7 0 0 0 0 0 
			 351 Bury 6 0 (6)— 6 (6)— 0 0 
			 875 Cheshire 19 12 8 16 (6)— 0 0 
			 909 Cumbria (6)— 7 3 5 0 0 (6)— 
			 876 Halton 12 4 (6)— 5 0 0 0 
			 340 Knowsley 14 3 4 4 0 0 (6)— 
			 888 Lancashire 28 26 5 30 4 (6)— 0 
			 341 Liverpool 13 (6)— 0 5 (6)— 0 0 
			 352 Manchester 7 11 0 8 0 0 0 
			 353 Oldham 13 3 (6)— 7 0 0 (6)— 
			 354 Rochdale(5) 7 4 (6)— 4 0 0 0 
			 355 Salford 7 11 (6)— 8 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			 343 Sefton 4 3 (6)— 5 0 0 0 
			 342 St. Helens 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 356 Stockport 7 3 (6)— 9 0 0 0 
			 357 Tameside 3 8 (6)— (6)— 0 (6)— 0 
			 358 Trafford 3 (6)— (6)— (6)— (6)— 0 0 
			 877 Warrington (6)— 3 0 3 0 0 0 
			 359 Wigan 4 3 (6)— 3 0 0 (6)— 
			 344 Wirral (6)— 4 (6)— 7 0 0 (6)— 
			  
			   Yorkshire and the Humber 120 70 20 80 (7)— (7)— 10 
			 370 Barnsley 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 380 Bradford 17 6 4 6 (6)— (6)— (6)— 
			 381 Calderdale 6 3 (6)— (6)— (6)— (6)— 0 
			 371 Doncaster 6 4 3 9 0 0 0 
			 811 East Riding of Yorkshire 4 3 (6)— (6)— (6)— 0 (6)— 
			 810 Kingston Upon Hull, City of 6 14 (6)— 6 0 0 (6)— 
			 382 Kirklees 7 7 0 10 0 0 0 
			 383 Leeds 19 12 (6)— 8 0 0 (6)— 
			 812 North East Lincolnshire (6)— (6)— 0 3 0 0 0 
			 813 North Lincolnshire 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 815 North Yorkshire 3 (6)— (6)— 9 0 0 (6)— 
			 372 Rotherham 4 (6)— (6)— 5 0 (6)— 0 
			 373 Sheffield 27 5 4 14 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			 384 Wakefield 13 4 0 6 0 0 (6)— 
			 816 York 10 3 4 7 0 0 0 
			  
			   East Midlands( 4) 120 80 30 100 10 (7)— 10 
			 831 Derby 4 (6)— (6)— 3 (6)— 0 0 
			 830 Derbyshire 18 9 (6)— 6 (6)— 0 0 
			 856 Leicester 14 7 3 9 0 0 5 
			 855 Leicestershire 18 14 4 19 6 0 (6)— 
			 925 Lincolnshire 13 8 9 17 4 4 (6)— 
			 928 Northamptonshire 16 14 4 20 (6)— 0 0 
			 892 Nottingham 7 7 (6)— 8 (6)— 0 0 
			 891 Nottinghamshire 31 16 (6)— 17 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			 857 Rutland 0 (6)— 0 0 0 0 0 
			  
			   West Midlands( 4) 120 80 30 110 10 10 10 
			 330 Birmingham 42 15 12 20 3 0 8 
			 331 Coventry (6)— 0 0 5 0 0 0 
			 332 Dudley (6)— 5 0 16 0 (6)— (6)— 
			 884 Herefordshire (6)— 3 0 0 0 0 0 
			 333 Sandwell 8 12 (6)— 3 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			 893 Shropshire (6)— (6)— 0 3 (6)— 0 0 
			 334 Solihull 9 4 (6)— 3 (6)— (6)— 0 
			 860 Staffordshire 14 11 9 13 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			 861 Stoke-on-Trent 3 3 (6)— 3 0 (6)— 0 
			 894 Telford and Wrekin 5 6 0 4 0 0 0 
			 335 Walsall 3 (6)— (6)— 5 0 0 0 
			 937 Warwickshire 18 6 4 13 (6)— (6)— (6)— 
			 336 Wolverhampton 3 (6)— 0 0 0 0 0 
			 885 Worcestershire 11 10 (6)— 18 6 0 0 
			  
			   East of England( 4) 110 50 30 70 10 (7)— 10 
			 820 Bedfordshire 18 8 7 7 (6)— 0 0 
			 873 Cambridgeshire 3 (6)— 0 0 (6)— 0 0 
			 881 Essex 18 11 6 21 3 0 (6)— 
			 919 Hertfordshire 28 9 8 23 (6)— (6)— (6)— 
			 821 Luton 5 3 (6)— 0 0 0 0 
			 926 Norfolk 8 5 0 8 (6)— (6)— 0 
			 874 Peterborough 7 0 (6)— 5 0 0 0 
			 882 Southend-on-Sea 4 3 (6)— (6)— 0 0 0 
			 935 Suffolk 11 4 8 8 (6)— 0 3 
			 883 Thurrock (6)— 4 0 0 0 0 (6)— 
			  
			   London( 4) 280 120 70 110 20 (7)— 30 
			   Inner London( 4) 90 50 10 30 (7)— (7)— (7)— 
			 202 Camden (6)— (6)— (6)— (6)— (6)— 0 0 
			 201 City of London 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 204 Hackney 6 6 0 (6)— 0 0 (6)— 
			 205 Hammersmith and Fulham 0 (6)— 0 0 (6)— 0 0 
			 309 Haringey 3 5 (6)— 3 0 0 0 
			 206 Islington 4 (6)— 0 0 0 0 (6)— 
			 207 Kensington and Chelsea (6)— 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 208 Lambeth 11 (6)— (6)— 3 (6)— 0 0 
			 209 Lewisham 10 6 3 0 0 0 0 
			 316 Newham 8 5 (6)— 7 0 (6)— (6)— 
			 210 Southwark 13 5 5 8 0 0 0 
			 211 Tower Hamlets 15 9 0 4 (6)— 0 0 
			 212 Wandsworth 9 4 (6)— 0 0 0 (6)— 
			 213 Westminster 8 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 0 0 
			  
			   Outer London( 4) 190 70 60 80 10 (7)— 30 
			 301 Barking and Dagenham 5 3 (6)— 3 0 0 5 
			 302 Barnet 4 3 3 (6)— 0 0 (6)— 
			 303 Bexley 8 3 (6)— 3 0 0 0 
			 304 Brent 20 7 (6)— 6 0 0 0 
			 305 Bromley 8 6 6— 5 3 0 6 
			 306 Croydon 23 8 11 6 (6)— 0 0 
			 307 Ealing 7 (6)— (6)— 4 0 0 0 
			 308 Enfield 13 10 (6)— 7 0 (6)— 7 
			 203 Greenwich 16 (6)— 8 11 (6)— (6)— (6)— 
			 310 Harrow 10 4 (6)— (6)— (6)— 0 (6)— 
			 311 Havering 13 6 5 4 0 0 0 
			 312 Hillingdon 7 6 0 4 0 0 0 
			 313 Hounslow 15 6 (6)— 8 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			 314 Kingston upon Thames 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 315 Merton 9 (6)— (6)— (6)— (6)— 0 (6)— 
			 317 Redbridge 5 (6)— 5 6 (6)— 0 3 
			 318 Richmond upon Thames 3 (6)— 3 (6)— 0 0 0 
			 319 Sutton 7 (6)— (6)— 6 0 0 0 
			 320 Waltham Forest 9 (6)— 3 (6)— 0 0 0 
			  
			   South East( 4) 170 90 60 150 10 (7)— 20 
			 867 Bracknell Forest 0 (6)— (6)— (6)— 0 0 0 
			 846 Brighton and Hove 3 4 0 (6)— 0 0 0 
			 825 Buckinghamshire 8 7 0 7 0 0 4 
			 845 East Sussex 16 4 4 4 0 0 0 
			 850 Hampshire 29 15 11 29 0 0 (6)— 
			 921 Isle of Wight (6)— (6)— (6)— 4 0 0 0 
			 886 Kent 36 14 10 31 (6)— 0 6 
			 887 Medway 3 4 0 4 0 0 0 
			 826 Milton Keynes 8 3 (6)— 6 0 0 0 
			 931 Oxfordshire 7 (6)— 3 13 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			 851 Portsmouth (6)— 3 0 (6)— 0 0 0 
			 870 Reading 3 (6)— (6)— (6)— 0 0 0 
			 871 Slough (6)— (6)— (6)— 0 0 0 0 
			 852 Southampton 3 6 (6)— (6)— 0 0 0 
			 936 Surrey 19 4 13 21 4 0 (6)— 
			 869 West Berkshire 7 4 0 5 0 0 0 
			 938 West Sussex 18 10 7 10 (6)— (6)— 0 
			 868 Windsor and Maidenhead 3 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 0 0 
			 872 Wokingham 8 4 6— 3 0 0 (6)— 
			  
			   South West( 4) 110 70 40 80 (7)— (7)— 10 
			 800 Bath and North East Somerset 5 (6)— (6)— (6)— 0 0 0 
			 837 Bournemouth 6 5 (6)— 0 0 0 0 
			 801 Bristol, City of 12 8 (6)— 3 0 0 0 
			 908 Cornwall 6 8 3 13 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			 878 Devon 14 8 6 11 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			 835 Dorset 3 (6)— (6)— (6)— 0 0 0 
			 916 Gloucestershire 9 5 6 13 0 0 (6)— 
			 420 Isles of Scilly 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 802 North Somerset 3 (6)— 0 0 0 0 0 
			 879 Plymouth 6 11 (6)— 10 (6)— (6)— 3 
			 836 Poole 4 (6)— (6)— 3 0 0 0 
			 933 Somerset 21 8 4 11 (6)— 0 (6)— 
			 803 South Gloucestershire 9 4 (6)— 7 0 0 (6)— 
			 866 Swindon 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 
			 880 Torbay 4 3 0 6— 0 0 0 
			 865 Wiltshire 7 7 (6)— 9 0 0 0 
		
	
	
		
			Number of fixed period exclusions 
			Drug and alcohol related  Damage  Theft  Persistent disruptive behaviour  Other  Total( 3) 
			   England( 4) 450 170 220 2,370 1,340 7,990 
			 
			   North East( 4) 30 10 10 100 50 380 
			 841 Darlington (6)— 0 (6)— 9 9 40 
			 840 Durham 4 0 0 11 12 60 
			 390 Gateshead (6)— 0 0 8 4 30 
			 805 Hartlepool (6)— 0 0 7 0 20 
			 806 Middlesbrough 0 0 0 6 (6)— 10 
			 391 Newcastle upon Tyne 3 4 6 23 3 70 
			 392 North Tyneside 0 0 0 (6)— (6)— 10 
			 929 Northumberland 9 3 (6)— 14 8 70 
			 807 Redcar and Cleveland 0 0 (6)— 8 (6)— 20 
			 393 South Tyneside 3 0 (6)— 7 8 30 
			 808 Stockton-on-Tees (6)— (6)— 0 5 (6)— 20 
			 394 Sunderland (6)— 0 0 0 0 (7)— 
			 
			   North West( 4,5) 60 30 40 320 170 1,120 
			 889 Blackburn with Darwen 0 4 0 7 3 30 
			 890 Blackpool 0 (6)— 0 5 7 40 
			 350 Bolton (6)— (6)— (6)— 14 (6)— 30 
			 351 Bury 0 (6)— (6)— (6)— (6)— 20 
			 875 Cheshire 7 3 (6)— 57 11 140 
			 909 Cumbria 8 0 (6)— 13 4 40 
			 876 Halton (6)— (6)— 0 7 0 30 
			 340 Knowsley 0 0 (6)— 6 5 40 
			 888 Lancashire 17 4 7 78 40 240 
			 341 Liverpool 0 (6)— 4 12 15 50 
			 352 Manchester (6)— 3 4 15 14 60 
			 353 Oldham 4 0 (6)— 6 20 60 
			 354 Rochdale(5) 0 0 3 9 13 40 
			 355 Salford 4 4 (6)— 9 (6)— 50 
			 343 Sefton 0 0 (6)— 9 3 30 
			 342 St. Helens 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 356 Stockport 7 (6)— 11 9 11 60 
			 357 Tameside 3 3 0 24 8 50 
			 358 Trafford 3 0 0 4 3 20 
			 877 Warrington (6)— 0 0 12 4 30 
			 359 Wigan (6)— 0 (6)— 3 (6)— 20 
			 344 Wirral 4 (6)— 0 14 5 40 
			 
			   Yorkshire and the Humber 40 10 10 190 110 680 
			 370 Barnsley 0 0 0 (6)— (6)— (7)— 
			 380 Bradford 6 0 0 19 17 80 
			 381 Calderdale 10 0 (6)— 15 7 50 
			 371 Doncaster (6)— (6)— 0 18 7 50 
			 811 East Riding of Yorkshire (6)— 3 0 7 7 30 
			 810 Kingston Upon Hull, City of (6)— (6)— (6)— 6 6 40 
			 382 Kirklees 0 0 (6)— 10 9 40 
			 383 Leeds 3 (6)— (6)— 20 16 90 
			 812 North East Lincolnshire (6)— (6)— (6)— 17 10 40 
			 813 North Lincolnshire 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 815 North Yorkshire 4 (6)— (6)— 16 (6)— 40 
			 372 Rotherham 0 (6)— 0 8 13 40 
			 373 Sheffield (6)— 4 0 26 15 100 
			 384 Wakefield 5 0 (6)— 14 4 50 
			 816 York 4 0 (6)— 13 0 40 
			 
			   East Midlands( 4) 50 10 10 220 120 770 
			 831 Derby (6)— 0 (6)— 8 5 30 
			 830 Derbyshire 9 (6)— (6)— 31 43 120 
			 856 Leicester (6)— (6)— (6)— 6 7 60 
			 855 Leicestershire 9 (6)— (6)— 40 8 120 
			 925 Lincolnshire 12 3 5 39 9 130 
			 928 Northamptonshire 10 4 (6)— 52 11 130 
			 892 Nottingham 4 3 (6)— 9 7 50 
			 891 Nottinghamshire 6 0 (6)— 36 27 160 
			 857 Rutland 0 0 0 0 0 (7)— 
			 
			   West Midlands( 4) 50 20 20 240 170 870 
			 330 Birmingham 11 4 8 52 71 250 
			 331 Coventry 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 0 10 
			 332 Dudley 0 7 0 9 23 70 
			 884 Herefordshire (6)— 0 0 10 5 20 
			 333 Sandwell 6 (6)— (6)— 19 17 70 
			 893 Shropshire (6)— 0 0 3 6 20 
			 334 Solihull 0 (6)— (6)— 19 6 50 
			 860 Staffordshire 10 0 (6)— 35 11 110 
			 861 Stoke-on-Trent 0 0 0 (6)— 7 20 
			 894 Telford and Wrekin 6 (6)— 0 11 8 40 
			 335 Walsall 0 0 (6)— 7 3 20 
			 937 Warwickshire 6 (6)— 3 39 8 100 
			 336 Wolverhampton 5 0 0 (6)— (6)— 10 
			 885 Worcestershire 3 (6)— (6)— 26 4 80 
			 
			   East of England( 4) 40 20 30 260 100 730 
			 820 Bedfordshire 6 (6)— 4 18 9 80 
			 873 Cambridgeshire 0 0 0 (6)— (6)— 10 
			 881 Essex 7 7 (6)— 71 27 180 
			 919 Hertfordshire 11 (6)— 8 82 26 200 
			 821 Luton (6)— 0 3 11 3 30 
			 926 Norfolk 11 3 3 24 7 70 
			 874 Peterborough 0 0 (6)— 13 (6)— 30 
			 882 Southend-on-Sea 0 0 0 14 7 30 
			 935 Suffolk 5 5 3 19 12 80 
			 883 Thurrock (6)— 0 0 9 5 20 
			 
			   London( 4) 70 10 50 320 290 1,360 
			   Inner London( 4) 10 (7)— 10 50 110 370 
			 202 Camden 0 0 0 4 (6)— 10 
			 201 City of London 0 0 0 0 0  
			 204 Hackney 0 0 0 3 8 30 
			 205 Hammersmith and Fulham 4 0 0 4 0 10 
			 309 Haringey (6)— 0 0 0 18 30 
			 206 Islington 0 0 (6)— (6)— 4 10 
			 207 Kensington and Chelsea (6)— 0 (6)— 6 (6)— 10 
			 208 Lambeth 3 0 0 4 5 30 
			 209 Lewisham 0 0 0 3 5 30 
			 316 Newham 0 0 (6)— 10 22 60 
			 210 Southwark 0 0 0 0 3 40 
			 211 Tower Hamlets (6)— (6)— 3 3 23 60 
			 212 Wandsworth (6)— 0 (6)— 9 15 40 
			 213 Westminster 0 0 0 5 3 20 
			 
			   Outer London( 4) 60 10 40 270 180 990 
			 301 Barking and Dagenham 0 0 (6)— 13 7 40 
			 302 Barnet 3 0 (6)— 13 10 40 
			 303 Bexley (6)— (6)— 0 14 16 50 
			 304 Brent (6)— 0 0 29 13 80 
			 305 Bromley 5 (6)— 0 19 23 80 
			 306 Croydon 6 (6)— 7 33 13 110 
			 307 Ealing 7 (6)— 6 17 12 70 
			 308 Enfield (6)— 0 3 20 8 70 
			 203 Greenwich (6)— 0 (6)— 13 18 70 
			 310 Harrow (6)— 0 0 3 3 30 
			 311 Havering 6 0 (6)— 6 7 50 
			 312 Hillingdon (6)— (6)— (6)— 8 22 50 
			 313 Hounslow 7 (6)— (6)— 32 4 80 
			 314 Kingston upon Thames (6)— 0 (6)— 0 (6)— 10 
			 315 Merton (6)— 0 3 9 3 30 
			 317 Redbridge (6)— (6)— 3 9 5 40 
			 318 Richmond upon Thames 0 0 0 6 (6)— 20 
			 319 Sutton 5 0 4 6 3 30 
			 320 Waltham Forest 3 (6)— 0 17 9 50 
			 
			   South East( 4) 70 30 40 430 240 1,310 
			 867 Bracknell Forest 3 0 0 12 4 20 
			 846 Brighton and Hove (6)— 4 (6)— 12 (6)— 30 
			 825 Buckinghamshire 5 (6)— (6)— 8 12 50 
			 845 East Sussex 5 3 (6)— 22 17 80 
			 850 Hampshire 4 3 4 50 10 160 
			 921 Isle of Wight (6)— (6)— 0 (6)— (6)— 10 
			 886 Kent 12 7 12 78 101 310 
			 887 Medway (6)— 0 0 17 5 40 
			 826 Milton Keynes 0 0 4 10 10 50 
			 931 Oxfordshire 5 (6)— 0 24 6 70 
			 851 Portsmouth 0 3 0 (6)— 4 10 
			 870 Reading 0 (6)— 0 9 3 20 
			 871 Slough 0 0 0 0 (6)— (7)— 
			 852 Southampton (6)— 0 (6)— 5 (6)— 20 
			 936 Surrey 6 0 (6)— 79 34 180 
			 869 West Berkshire 5 3 (6)— 13 9 50 
			 938 West Sussex 17 (6)— 3 77 10 160 
			 868 Windsor and Maidenhead 0 0 0 8 3 20 
			 872 Wokingham (6)— (6)— 4 6 3 30 
			 
			   South West( 4) 40 20 20 290 80 770 
			 800 Bath and North East Somerset 4 4 (6)— 15 3 40 
			 837 Bournemouth (6)— 0 (6)— 0 0 20 
			 801 Bristol, City of 4 0 3 15 7 50 
			 908 Cornwall 3 (6)— (6)— 37 14 90 
			 878 Devon (6)— 0 (6)— 40 16 100 
			 835 Dorset (6)— 0 (6)— 7 3 20 
			 916 Gloucestershire 11 (6)— (6)— 48 20 120 
			 420 Isles of Scilly 0 0 0 0 0 (7)— 
			 802 North Somerset 4 0 0 5 0 10 
			 879 Plymouth (6)— (6)— (6)— 13 (6)— 50 
			 836 Poole 0 (6)— (6)— 13 0 30 
			 933 Somerset 5 3 (6)— 31 3 90 
			 803 South Gloucestershire (6)— 0 (6)— 9 8 40 
			 866 Swindon 0 (6)— 0 15 3 30 
			 880 Torbay 0 0 0 14 (6)— 20 
			 865 Wiltshire (6)— 3 (6)— 33 4 70 
			 (1) Includes middle schools as deemed. (2) Excludes non-maintained special schools. (3) Estimates based on incomplete pupil level data. (4) Totals for England, each region and across all reasons for exclusion have been rounded to the nearest 10. (5) There are two permanent exclusions in Rochdale local authority for which reason for exclusion has not been established. These have been included in the total column only. (6) One or two exclusions (7)— Less than five exclusions  Source: School Census

TREASURY

Employment

Stephen Hepburn: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer 
	(1)  how many  (a) women,  (b) single parents and  (c) people were in work in (i) Jarrow constituency, (ii) south Tyneside, (iii) the north-east and (iv) the UK in each year since 1997;
	(2)  what the level of  (a) adult and  (b) youth unemployment was in (i) Jarrow constituency, (ii) south Tyneside, (iii) the north-east and (iv) the UK in each year since 1997;

Angela Eagle: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician, who has been asked to reply. The relevant tables have been placed in the Library.
	 Letter from Karen Dunnell, dated 9 October 2007:
	As National Statistician, I have been asked to reply to your Parliamentary Questions about employment and unemployment. (156032, 156033, 156034, 156035)
	These questions ask for the same information as questions received in July this year, and I refer you to the answer given in  Official Report volume 463 of 26 July, column 1460.
	However, since the previous questions were answered, we now have new employment and unemployment data from the Annual Population Survey (APS) for April 2006 to March 2007, and the April to June 2007 Labour Force Survey (LFS) household dataset.
	As in the previous answer, Table 1, attached, shows the number of males, females and people, who were (i) aged 16 and over, (ii) young persons aged 16 to 24 and (iii) persons aged 25 and over, resident in the Jarrow constituency, who were in employment, for the 12 months ending in March 2007 from the APS. The table also shows employment rates which allow changes to be seen in the context of changing population numbers. Tables 2 to 4 show data for South Tyneside metropolitan borough, the North East and Great Britain respectively.
	For unitary and local authorities, the ONS produces estimates of total unemployment, following ILO definitions, from a statistical model. Annual estimates for other areas and breakdowns are compiled from the annual local area LFS and the APS following ILO definitions.
	Table 5, attached, shows the number of males, females and people, who were (i) aged 16 and over, (ii) young persons aged 16 to 24 and (iii) persons aged 25 and over, resident in the Jarrow constituency, who were unemployed, for the 12 months ending March 2007, from the APS. The table also shows unemployment rates which allow changes to be seen in the context of changing population numbers. Tables 6 to 8 show data for South Tyneside metropolitan borough, the North East and Great Britain respectively.
	Table 9, attached shows employment levels, unemployment levels and rates for lone parents aged 16 and over and employment rates for lone parents of working age, resident in the South Tyneside metropolitan borough, the North East and Great Britain, for the three months ending in June, for 2007 from the LFS household datasets. Data for the Jarrow constituency are unavailable as Parliamentary Constituency markers are not held in this dataset.
	The estimates in Tables 1-9 are for a subset of the population in small geographical areas, they are based on small sample sizes, and are therefore subject to large margins of uncertainty. In this case, the sample sizes for the Jarrow constituency and South Tyneside metropolitan borough are not sufficient to give an accurate estimate of even the direction of the change over time.

Smuggling: Birds

David Taylor: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many incidents of wild bird smuggling have been recorded by HM Revenue and Customs since 1 July 2007.

Jane Kennedy: HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) enforcement powers in relation to wild birds apply to those species listed as endangered under Council Regulation (EC) No. 338/97 on the protection species of wild fauna and flora.
	HMRC records show no detentions or seizures of wild birds since 1 July 2007.

TRANSPORT

Buoyancy Aids: Fishing Vessels

Angus MacNeil: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what research the Maritime and Coastguard Agency has undertaken on the potential to save lives of the introduction of compulsory personal flotation devices to the UK fishing fleet; and if she will make a statement.

Jim Fitzpatrick: The Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) commissioned research entitled "Practical Application of Regulatory Impact Diagrams to Buoyancy Equipment at Work for Fishermen" which was completed in February 2001. This addressed all factors which may affect the wearing of buoyancy devices at sea.
	All fishing vessels are required to carry lifejackets but the report argued that prior to taking a regulatory approach to wearing lifejackets, we needed to identify the needs and experiences of lifejacket users, in order to gauge the requirements for regulations. This finding was supported by research which demonstrated that safety precautions show little correlation with the likelihood of accidents.
	Following publication of this report the MCA has participated in research by the Seafish Industry Authority (Seafish) and the Royal National Lifeboat Institute on Lifejacket and Buoyancy Aid Acceptability Trials. The trials of 24 products were in two stages, a test tank assessment to ensure that products are effective when worn with 'sea gear' and long term assessments by fishermen in the course of fishing.
	The results of the research have been made available to the industry to inform the purchase and wearing of such equipment and manufacturers of buoyancy aids and lifejackets to inform development.
	The MCA has also recently undertaken research on the approach taken to the wearing of lifejackets adopted by other countries, and the effect on casualty statistics, and is currently assessing the findings of this research.

Departments: Publicity

Mark Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what her Department's projected spending is on advertising and promotional campaigns for  (a) 2007-08 and  (b) 2008-09, broken down by cost relating to (i) television, (ii) radio and (iii) print media.

Jim Fitzpatrick: The Department's projected spending for advertising campaigns for the 2007-08 fiscal year is set out in the following table. Please note, these are anticipated spend and could be subject to change. Additional advertising costs, such as cinema, ambient and online, have been incorporated into 'other' advertising costs.
	The main expenditure by the Central Department is in support of the THINK! Road Safety, Act On CO2 and Aviation campaigns. DVLA investment is in support of their vehicle excise duty enforcement, electronic vehicle licensing and sales of marks campaigns.
	
		
			  2007-08 
			  £000 
			   Television  Radio  Print  Other 
			 Central DfT 6,099 2,350 1 ,800 3,711 
			 DSA 40 0 50 0 
			 DVLA 3,617 1 ,567 457 0 
			 HA 0 60 120 20 
			 VOSA 0 0 0 0 
			 MCA 15 0 1.7 0 
			 VCA 0 0 46 0 
		
	
	The Department's projected spending for advertising campaigns for the 2008-09 fiscal year is more difficult to project because some budgets have yet to be allocated. We anticipate that circa £11 million will be spent by Department for Transport and £4.6 million by Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA). Investment in each specific media channel has yet to be finalised.
	Breaking down the costs of promotional campaigns for the Department by television, radio and print media for 2007-08 and 2008-09 fiscal years could be done at only disproportionate cost.

Lorries: Licensing

Gwyneth Dunwoody: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what the most recent estimate is of the number of  (a) heavy goods vehicles and  (b) public service vehicles which should be covered by an operators licence but are not.

Jim Fitzpatrick: The Department is responsible for the enforcement of road traffic legislation. Records are kept of the number of operator licences issued. An operator licence may list a number of vehicles. The Department's records do not detail the number of vehicles as a percentage of the total heavy goods vehicles and public service vehicles fleets in use.
	Although DVLA may have records of HGVs and PSVs registered, some will not require an operator licence. One operator licence holder can have multiple vehicles listed. In addition, it is not mandatory for PSV operators to list all the vehicles that they may use on their operator licence. So the DVLA and VOSA records cannot be directly compared.

Lorries: Safety

Gwyneth Dunwoody: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what the most recent estimate is of  (a) heavy goods vehicles and  (b) public service vehicles which should have an annual safety check conducted by the Vehicle and Operator Services Agency but do not.

Jim Fitzpatrick: The Vehicle and Operator Services Agency (VOSA) is responsible for the enforcement of road safety legislation. Its records reflect the number of heavy goods vehicles (HGV) and public service vehicles (PSV) which have presented for annual test. Its records do not record this as a percentage of the total HGV and PSV fleets in use.
	Although the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) may have records of HGVs and PSV's registered, some may be exempt from annual tests or have been declared as off the road (and therefore not require a certificate.) Also VOSA may have tested some vehicles more than once in a year so the DVLA and VOSA records cannot be directly compared.

WORK AND PENSIONS

Carers' Allowances

Ian Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will extend eligibility to carer's allowance to allow a carer to receive carer's allowance in respect of more than one individual in the same household.

Anne McGuire: Carer's allowance is intended principally to provide a measure of financial support for carers who cannot work full-time because they provide at least 35 hours of care a week for a severely disabled person. It is not payable in respect of each disabled person a carer may look after and we have no plans to change these arrangements.

Children: Maintenance

Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many Child Support Agency cases have been outstanding for more than  (a) one year and  (b) five years.

James Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the chief executive. He will write to the hon. Member.
	 Letter from Duncan Gilchrist, dated 10 October 2007:
	In reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency, the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive. As the Chief Executive is currently on annual leave, I am responding, with his authority, on his behalf.
	You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many Child Support Agency cases have been outstanding for more than (a) one year and (b) five years.
	The Agency begins to process new applications as soon as they are received and continues until they have been cleared. Any applications that have not yet been cleared have been regarded as outstanding in the answer to this question. The amount of work required to achieve clearance and the elapsed time it involves varies considerably depending on, amongst other things, the circumstances of the parents and how readily they cooperate with the Agency. As such, the Agency holds only a negligible number of completely unprocessed applications.
	At June 2007 the Agency had 39,600 old scheme and 74,400 new scheme uncleared cases over one year old, this represents 8% of total caseload. Of those 33,300 old scheme and 1,500 new scheme uncleared cases were over five years old, this represents 3% of total caseload.
	A potential new application is defined as cleared when it:
	has had a calculation and a payment arrangement set up (new scheme only) or has had an assessment (old scheme only);
	has been closed;
	has been identified as having had a good cause decision accepted;
	has been identified as being subject to a reduced benefit decision;
	has been identified as a change of circumstances to an existing case, as opposed to a new application (new scheme only).
	I hope you find this answer helpful.

Departments: IT

Danny Alexander: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many IT contracts were put out to competitive tender by his Department in each year since 1997; how many bidders there were for each tender; and which company won the tender in each case.

Mike O'Brien: holding answer 17 September 2007
	The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) was created in June 2001, prior to that, contractual arrangements were the responsibility of different departments and agencies. Information is provided for contracts awarded since the formation of the Department in 2001.
	Wherever possible, the Department makes use of existing framework agreements to procure the full range of IS/IT services. This enables more efficient and faster procurement of services against agreed terms. When this is not possible an advertisement is placed in the Official Journal of the European Union.
	Two contracts have been awarded as a result of competitive tender through the Official Journal of the European Union. These are the:
	Contract to operate the Resource Management system. Three bids were received and the contract was awarded to Fujitsu in 2004.
	Framework to enable the Department to procure the full range of IS/IT services via competitions or single tender. This is referred to as the Unity (UNderpinning IT DeliverY) framework and was awarded in 2005. Thirty four bids were received and thirty two suppliers were included onto the Framework Agreement.
	Other contracts awarded since 2001 using either the Unity framework, or the Office of Government Commerce's S-Cat agreement, are:
	
		
			  Contract awarded to  
			 Accenture Employment Support Allowance 
			 Accenture Customer Information System 
			 Accenture Pensions Transformation Project 
			 Atos Stand Alone Support Applications 
			 Atos Debt Management 
			 Atos Working Age Transformation and Change, Benefit Processing Replacement Programme 
			 Atos Bank Liaison Automation System 
			 Energis Government Secure Intranet (GSI) 
			 IBM Working Age Transformation and Change, Benefit Processing Replacement Programme 
			 IBM Customer Management System 
			 Oracle Resource Management 
			 Logica Pensions Regulator 
			 Siemens Central Payments System 
			 Xansa Work Train Project

Departments: IT

Danny Alexander: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the  (a) estimated and  (b) outturn (i) cost and (ii) duration was of each IT contract tendered by his Department since 1997.

Mike O'Brien: holding answer 17 September 2007
	The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) was created in June 2001, prior to that, contractual arrangements were the responsibility of different departments and agencies. Information is provided for contracts awarded since the formation of the Department in 2001.
	Outturn figures are not available until the contract has ended, so the most recently estimated contract outturn or cost to date has been provided in the following table.
	
		
			  Contract  Contract estimate (£ million)  Most recently estimated contract outturn (£ million)  Duration (to) 
			  Accenture
			 Employment Support Allowance Stage 1 9.23 9.23 Oct 2008 
			 Customer Information System 47.38 47.38 2008 
			 Pensions Transformation Project 181.3 165.1 2010-11 
			 
			  ATOS Origin
			 Stand Alone Small Applications 2.66 2.66 2009 
			 Debt Management 22.4 14.8 (cost to date) 2008 
			 Working Age Transformation and Change, Benefit Processing Replacement Programme 0.495 0.495 June 2006 
			 Bank Liaison Automation System Technology 0.66 0.66 February 2009 
			 
			  Energis
			 Government Secure Intranet (GSI) Anti Virus Protection 1.722 1.722 2005 
			 
			  Fujitsu
			 Resource Management (Operate) 44.83 44.83 2009 
			 
			  IBM
			 Working Age Transformation and Change, Benefit Processing Replacement Programme 123.4 49.8 2007 
			 Customer Management System 103 103 2006 
			 
			  Oracle
			 Resource Management Application Development and Support 32.2 32.2 2007 
			 
			  Logica
			 Pensions Regulator 0.649 0.649 2005 
			 
			  Siemens
			 Central Payments System 59.6 59.6 December 2010 
			 
			  Xansa
			 Work Train Project 9.5 9.5 November 2008

Departments: Telephone Services

David Lidington: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what proportion of telephone calls to his Department from members of the public are recorded for training purposes.

Anne McGuire: All calls to the Department's contact centres are recorded and may be used for training purposes except:
	when technical issues arise;
	textphone calls;
	eight Jobcentre Plus sites do not have the technical ability to record calls; and
	National Benefit Fraud Hotline calls due to their sensitive nature.
	Calls made directly to the operational teams and local services are not recorded.

Disability Living Allowance

Mark Harper: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions pursuant to the answer of 17 September 2007,  Official Report, columns 2281-2W, on disability living allowance, whether a decision by a customer to begin work amounts to change in circumstances; and to what extent such a decision affects eligibility for disability living allowance or the amount awarded.

Anne McGuire: Customers in receipt of Disability Living Allowance who begin work do not have to report that event as a change of circumstances unless their care and/or mobility needs have changed in the period leading up to them beginning work or as a result of beginning work.

Disabled

Mark Harper: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what mechanisms are in place to assess the likely effect of proposed legislation on people with disabilities; and if he will make a statement.

Anne McGuire: To meet the requirements of the Disability Equality Duty, Government Departments must assess the likely impact of proposed legislation on disability equality. The disability equality duty, which was introduced by the Disability Discrimination Act 2005, came into force on 4 December 2006. It requires public authorities to have due regard to the need to eliminate disability discrimination and promote disability equality when carrying out their functions.
	The general duty applies across the full range of public sector activity, including service delivery, policy making, procurement and performance management. Additional duties are imposed by regulations on certain public authorities, including all Government Departments, to produce and implement a disability equality scheme in which the authority must set out its methods for assessing the impact on equality for disabled people of its proposed policies and practices.
	While the Disability Equality Duty provides the framework for assessing the impact of policies on disabled people the precise mechanism for carrying out the assessments is up to each Government Department to determine and set out in their scheme.

Disabled

Mark Harper: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many disabled people are resident in the UK; what mechanisms are used to estimate that figure; and if he will make a statement.

Anne McGuire: The Department for Work and Pensions estimates that there are over 10 million disabled people in Britain.
	This estimate covers the number of people with a longstanding illness, disability or infirmity, and who have a significant difficulty with day-to-day activities. It is based on data taken from the Family Resources Survey (FRS).
	Everyone in this group would meet the definition of disability in the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA); however, these estimates do not reflect the total number of people covered by the DDA as the FRS does not collect this information.
	The estimates are based on sample counts that have been adjusted for non-response using multi-purpose grossing factors which align the FRS to Government Office Region populations by age and sex. Estimates are subject to sampling error and remaining response bias.
	The Government's vision is that by 2025 all disabled people should have the same opportunities and choices as everyone else, be respected as equal members of society and be able to participate as equals in every aspect of family and community life.

National Insurance: Peterborough

Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many National Insurance numbers were issued to non-UK citizens living in  (a) Peterborough constituency and  (b) the Peterborough city council area in each year since 1997, broken down by nationality.

James Plaskitt: Information is not available prior to 2002-03. The available information has been placed in the Library.

UK Commission for Employment and Skills: Public Appointments

Dai Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how appointments will be made to the UK Commission for Employment and Skills; and what matters in respect of environmental sustainability will be taken into account in the work of the Commission.

Caroline Flint: Appointments will be made to the UK Commission for Employment and Skills through fair and open competition and under the guidelines issued by the Office of the Commissioner for Public Appointments.
	Skills development is a fundamental part of the drive for environmental sustainability and the UK Commission will be aiming to increase skill levels in all sectors and in all disciplines as it moves to meet the aspirations set out in the Leitch report.

Employment

Stephen Hepburn: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many  (a) women and  (b) single parents were unemployed in (i) Jarrow constituency, (ii) south Tyneside, (iii) the north-east and (iv) the UK in each year since 1997.

Angela Eagle: I have been asked to reply.
	The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician, who has been asked to reply. The relevant tables have been placed in the Library.
	 Letter from Karen Dunnell, dated 9 October 2007:
	As National Statistician, I have been asked to reply to your Parliamentary Questions about employment and unemployment. (156032, 156033, 156034, 156035)
	These questions ask for the same information as questions received in July this year, and I refer you to the answer given in  Official Report volume 463 of 26 July, column 1460.
	However, since the previous questions were answered, we now have new employment and unemployment data from the Annual Population Survey (APS) for April 2006 to March 2007, and the April to June 2007 Labour Force Survey (LFS) household dataset.
	As in the previous answer, Table 1, attached, shows the number of males, females and people, who were (i) aged 16 and over, (ii) young persons aged 16 to 24 and (iii) persons aged 25 and over, resident in the Jarrow constituency, who were in employment, for the 12 months ending in March 2007 from the APS. The table also shows employment rates which allow changes to be seen in the context of changing population numbers. Tables 2 to 4 show data for South Tyneside metropolitan borough, the North East and Great Britain respectively.
	For unitary and local authorities, the ONS produces estimates of total unemployment, following ILO definitions, from a statistical model. Annual estimates for other areas and breakdowns are compiled from the annual local area LFS and the APS following ILO definitions.
	Table 5, attached, shows the number of males, females and people, who were (i) aged 16 and over, (ii) young persons aged 16 to 24 and (iii) persons aged 25 and over, resident in the Jarrow constituency, who were unemployed, for the 12 months ending March 2007, from the APS. The table also shows unemployment rates which allow changes to be seen in the context of changing population numbers. Tables 6 to 8 show data for South Tyneside metropolitan borough, the North East and Great Britain respectively.
	Table 9, attached shows employment levels, unemployment levels and rates for lone parents aged 16 and over and employment rates for lone parents of working age, resident in the South Tyneside metropolitan borough, the North East and Great Britain, for the three months ending in June, for 2007 from the LFS household datasets. Data for the Jarrow constituency are unavailable as Parliamentary Constituency markers are not held in this dataset.
	The estimates in Tables 1-9 are for a subset of the population in small geographical areas, they are based on small sample sizes, and are therefore subject to large margins of uncertainty. In this case, the sample sizes for the Jarrow constituency and South Tyneside metropolitan borough are not sufficient to give an accurate estimate of even the direction of the change over time.

JUSTICE

Arrests: Foreigners

Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many individuals arrested in the Northern Basic Command Unit of Cambridgeshire Constabulary area were non-UK citizens of the European Union in each quarter since May 2004.

Maria Eagle: The arrests collection undertaken by my Department only provides data on persons arrested for recorded crime (notifiable offences) by age group, gender, ethnicity and main offence group. Aggregated data, collected centrally from the 43 police force areas in England and Wales, are available at police force area level only and do not record the nationality of arrestees.

Driving Offences: Insurance

Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many  (a) prosecutions and  (b) convictions there were of uninsured drivers in the Cambridgeshire Constabulary area in each recording period since May 2004; and if he will make a statement.

Maria Eagle: Available information for the Cambridgeshire police force area are taken from the Court Proceedings database held by my Department, from May to December 2004 (latest available) shows there were 1,840 proceedings and 1,560 findings of guilt for the offence of 'using motor vehicle uninsured against third party risks'.
	2005 data will be available later this year.

DEFENCE

Afghanistan: Peacekeeping Operations

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much fuel was consumed by UK armed forces in  (a) Afghanistan and  (b) Iraq in each month since the beginning of operations.

Bob Ainsworth: I am withholding the monthly consumption rates of fuel as their release would, or would be likely to, prejudice the capability, effectiveness and security of our armed forces.
	I am able to provide the total amount of fuel consumed by UK forces in Afghanistan and Iraq for those dates highlighted and this is shown in the following tables. Data are not held centrally on the dates prior to those stated and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
	
		
			  Afghanistan—total fuels consumed since October 2006-June 2007 
			   Litres 
			 Aviation fuel 71.7 million 
			 Diesel 2.75 million 
			 Petrol 85 thousand 
		
	
	This includes a small portion consumed by multinational elements of Task Force Helmand/Regional Command (South).
	
		
			  Iraq—total fuels consumed since January 2005-August 2007 
			   Litres 
			 Aviation Fuel 132.3 million 
			 Diesel 66.7 million 
			 Petrol 12.8 million

Afghanistan: Peacekeeping Operations

Tim Farron: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much depleted uranium ammunition has been used by British forces in Operation Herrick since 2002.

Bob Ainsworth: No depleted uranium ammunition has been used by UK forces in Operation Herrick since 2002.

Aircraft Carriers

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence for what percentage of time  (a) HMS Illustrious and  (b) HMS Ark Royal were (i) on operations and (ii) undergoing maintenance in each year since 1997.

Bob Ainsworth: I will write to the hon. Member and place a copy of my letter in the Library of the House.

Animal Experiments

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the answer of 16 April 2007,  Official Report, column 129W, on animal experiments, what his timetable is for making the appointments.

Bob Ainsworth: I can confirm that a team has been appointed to examine the future of animal testing in support of a possible future submarine escape and rescue research programme. The team comprises a core group of six specialists supported by a number of independent external advisers. It is led by an ex-military scientist, qualified to postdoctorate level, supported by subject matter experts in defence related human physiology research, submarine design and operation, and law pertaining to the use of animals in scientific research. The group of external advisers includes leading academics in the field of human physiology.

Animal Experiments

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many hyperbaric experiments have been carried out on live goats since March 2007; what plans he has to commission future experiments; and if he will make a statement.

Bob Ainsworth: I can confirm that no hyperbaric experiments using goats have been conducted since March 2007.
	A number of studies reviewing the need for further use of goats in this research programme are currently being undertaken. These studies take into account MOD's duty of care to sustain the health and welfare of submarine crews and to provide them with the ability to operate safely and effectively. The teams are investigating a range of options for submarine escape and rescue, and life support, including and excluding animal experimentation.
	Any plans to conduct further experiments using goats are subject to the findings of this review.

Armed Forces: Gliding

David Lidington: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what estimate he has made of the unit costs of  (a) tug and  (b) winch launches when used for glider flights as part of armed forces training courses.

Bob Ainsworth: The estimated unit cost of a tug launch and a winch launch for glider flights as part of training courses is shown as follows:
	
		
			  Type of launch  Estimated unit cost (£) 
			 Tug 12.06 
			 Winch 2.60

Armed Forces: Languages

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many  (a) Farsi/Dari,  (b) Arabic,  (c) Urdu,  (d) Pashto,  (e) Swahili,  (f) Uyghur,  (g) Uzbek  (h) Tajik and  (i) Kurdish speaking military personnel are serving in the British armed forces.

Bob Ainsworth: The numbers of presently serving military personnel known to have skills of at least standardized language profile (SLP) Level 1 in the specified languages are listed in the following table. The numbers are listed in two categories "tested" and "untested". Those included in the "tested" column have confirmed their skill in a military language examination within the last three years and their qualification is current. Those included in the "untested" column were either examined more than three years ago and their qualification has expired, or are known to have some level of skill which has not been confirmed by military language examination.
	
		
			  Language  Tested  Untested 
			 Farsi 72 79 
			 Dari 12 1 
			 Arabic 304 1,393 
			 Urdu 14 41 
			 Pashto 90 5 
			 Swahili 0 13 
		
	
	There are no records of any personnel having skills in Uyghur, Uzbek, Tajik or Kurdish.
	The table does not include records for special forces personnel.

Armed Forces: Languages

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many British military personnel have received training in  (a) Farsi/Dari,  (b) Arabic,  (c) Urdu,  (d) Pashto,  (e) Swahili,  (f) Uyghur,  (g) Uzbek  (h) Tajik and  (i) Kurdish in each year since 1997.

Bob Ainsworth: The following tables show the number of persons receiving training to at least standardized language profile (SLP) Level 1 in the languages for which information is requested. Despite extensive trawls, it is only possible to provide annual figures for Arabic. For the other languages, an aggregate figure for the entire period since 1997 has been collated.
	
		
			   Arabic 
			 1997 85 
			 1998 99 
			 1999 50 
			 2000 37 
			 2001 116 
			 2002 73 
			 2003 116 
			 2004 127 
			 2005 101 
			 2006 122 
			 2007 (1)233 
			 (1) To date 
		
	
	
		
			   Other languages: 1997-2007( 1) 
			 Farsi 163 
			 Dari 56 
			 Urdu 41 
			 Pashto 169 
			 Swahili 5 
			 Kurdish 2 
			 (1 )To date 
		
	
	No personnel have received any training in Uyghur, Uzbek or Tajik since 1997.
	Over the 10 year period, training organisations and military language examination systems have evolved considerably. This may have led to loss of data for the earlier part of the period, with the result that totals for each language are potentially understated. The figures quoted include special forces personnel.

Army: Deployment

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the average tour intervals are of the  (a) infantry,  (b) Royal Regiment of Artillery,  (c) the Corps of the Royal Engineers,  (d) the Royal Logistic Corps and  (e) the Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineers.

Bob Ainsworth: The average unit tour interval for the infantry and the Royal Regiment of Artillery is 23.5 and 20.8 months, respectively. This is calculated on the basis of the mean time between the start of the most recent deployment and the end of the previous deployment for all formed units within each arm.
	The unit tour interval is a less relevant measure when applied to the Corps of Royal Engineers, the Royal Logistic Corps and the Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineers. This is due to the frequency with which personnel move between formed units within these corps (which means that the personnel deployed with a unit will be substantially different from the personnel who deployed with the same unit on a previous occasion). Unit tour interval data for these corps is not therefore routinely collated.

Defence: Expenditure

Tobias Ellwood: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what proportion UK defence spending was of UK GDP in each financial year since 1997.

Bob Ainsworth: This information is published in HM Treasury's Public Expenditure Statistical Analysis. The most recent version, CM7019 from April 2007 is available in the Library of the House and at:
	www.hm-treasury.gov.uk.

Defence: Inflation

Gerald Howarth: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the defence inflation planning assumptions are for financial years 2007-08 to 2010-11.

Bob Ainsworth: In line with all Government Departments, the GDP deflator is used to estimate inflation. It is available on HM Treasury website:
	http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk
	As the GDP deflator is frequently updated, to simplify our internal planning process, inflation is currently rounded to 2.5 per cent.

Departments: Public Expenditure

Oliver Letwin: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will break down in  (a) near cash and  (b) non-cash terms columns 1-8 of the subhead detail tables for his Department contained in the (i) main estimate, (ii) winter supplementary estimate and (iii) spring supplementary estimate for financial years 2001-02 to 2007-08.

Bob Ainsworth: I will write to the right hon. Member and place a copy of my letter in the Library of the House.

Departments: Public Expenditure

Gerald Howarth: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence 
	(1)  what the  (a) planned (i) non-cash limit and (ii) near-cash resource Departmental Expenditure Limit (DEL),  (b) anticipated operating appropriations in aid,  (c) planned capital DEL and  (d) anticipated non-operating appropriations in aid are for each of his Department's top-level budget holders in each year of the comprehensive spending review;
	(2)  what the planned  (a) non-cash and  (b) near cash administration costs limit is for each of his Department's top-level budget holders in each year of the comprehensive spending review.

Bob Ainsworth: The Department is currently conducting a planning round to disaggregate the comprehensive spending review settlement; therefore this information is not currently available.

Departments: Public Expenditure

Gerald Howarth: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the near cash resource and capital departmental expenditure limits are for his Department in each year of the 2007 comprehensive spending review period.

Bob Ainsworth: The following table shows the Ministry of Defence's near-cash RDEL and CDEL over the CSR07 years.
	
		
			  £ million 
			   Near-cash resource DEL  Capital DEL 
			 2008-09 22,869 7,871 
			 2009-10 23,711 8,187 
			 2010-11 24,434 8,871

Departments: Public Expenditure

Gerald Howarth: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the financial year 2006-07 outturn for resources one, two and three provision for each subhead was broken down by  (a) near cash departmental expenditure limit (DEL),  (b) non-cash DEL,  (c) capital DEL,  (d) near cash annual managed expenditure,  (e) non-cash annual managed expenditure,  (f) capital annual managed expenditure,  (g) near cash non-budget and  (h) non-cash non-budget.

Bob Ainsworth: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 10 September 2007,  Official Report, columns 1888-93W.

EU Defence Policy

Keith Vaz: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when he next plans to meet his counterparts in  (a) France and  (b) other European states regarding the establishment of an autonomous European military capability.

Bob Ainsworth: The Secretary of State meets with the French Defence Minister as well as his other European Defence ministerial colleagues on a regular basis to discuss the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP). This includes at meetings of EU Defence Ministers such as that held by the EU presidency last week in Portugal where, collectively, Ministers met to take forward work on ESDP.

European Defence Agency: Finance

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much the UK has contributed to the European Defence Agency in each year since 2004.

Bob Ainsworth: Since the establishment of the European Defence Agency in July 2004, the UK has contributed:
	
		
			   £ 
			 2004 1,056,536.14 
			 2005 2,362,015.50 
			 2006 2,093,545.88 
			 2007 1,954,567.49

Iraq: Peacekeeping Operations

Harry Cohen: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when he expects UK forces to leave Iraq completely.

Des Browne: As the Prime Minister announced on 8 October, the number of British forces based in southern Iraq will reduce to around 4,500 by the end of the year. Our forces continue to have important work to do helping the Iraqi security forces further develop the capacity and capability to take over responsibility for the security of their own people. We keep force levels under constant review and will continue to make reductions as and when conditions on the ground allow. It is therefore wrong to set an arbitrary date for British forces to leave Iraq.

Military Exercises

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many urban warfare exercises have been conducted in each year since 2001.

Bob Ainsworth: The information is not held in the format requested as all three services conduct urban warfare exercises at varying scales.
	Land units are mandated to conduct urban training throughout the training cycle. However, urban training does not take place in isolation but is integrated into wider exercises. Training may involve low level activity focusing solely upon the urban environment or as part of wider collective training. The intensity of this urban training differs according to time and exercise area. By way of example, for the period September 2006 to September 2007(1), the Copehill Down Urban Training Village on Salisbury Plain was used for 296 days of urban training.
	Both the RN and RAF also conduct urban warfare exercises but at a much smaller scale. Since 2001 the annual programme for Commando Training Centre Royal Marines has routinely included urban warfare exercises, specifically 22 for Recruit Training, five for the All Arms Commando Course and two for Young Officer Courses, making a total of 29 annually. For the RAF, 14 urban warfare exercises were conducted in each year in the period 2001-03, rising to 18 annually thereafter.
	The individual training programme also includes urban training, though to varying degrees dependent upon the assessed need. By way of example, training at both the Infantry Battle School and the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst routinely incorporates urban exercises as part of their courses.
	Urban training is extensively practised within Pre Deployment Training for current operations, and incorporated into all unit training packages for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. The exact emphasis upon urban operations is driven by the role of the unit concerned.
	(1) Records for the amount of urban training across the entire Defence Estate are not held.

Navy: Bermuda

Andrew MacKinlay: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many Royal Navy craft of what classes have been deployed in Bermuda's territorial waters to promote law enforcement and national security in the last two years; what the estimated number is of Royal Navy personnel deployed; and if he will make a statement.

Bob Ainsworth: In the past two years four naval units have visited Bermuda: two ships were on Atlantic Patrol Task (North) and two were on routine transit visits. Although none of the ships went there with the specific purpose of promoting law enforcement, they bolstered national security by virtue of their presence.
	The Royal Navy does not track vessels in and out of territorial waters. Details of actual port visits to Bermuda are as follows:
	
		
			  Ship  Company  Visited 
			 HMS Cumberland 250 29 November to 2 December 2005 
			 HMS Torbay 130 25 March to 30 March 2006 
			 HMS Iron Duke 181 29 June to 3 July 2006 
			 HMS Scott 62 21 May to 26 May 2007

Navy: Bermuda

Andrew MacKinlay: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what financial contribution has been made by the Government of Bermuda towards the cost of the Royal Navy's deployment in Bermuda's territorial waters on the task of promoting law enforcement and national security in the last two years; and if he will make a statement.

Bob Ainsworth: None. The Government of Bermuda does not pay for Royal Navy deployments in Bermuda's territorial waters. The security of UK Overseas Territories is the responsibility of the UK Government.

Nimrod Aircraft

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what plans he has to provide the  (a) Nimrod and  (b) Nimrod MRA4 with (i) armour and (ii) fuel tank protection before deployment in theatre; and if he will make a statement.

Bob Ainsworth: Our aircraft are fitted with defensive systems and survivability aids to reflect the operational environment in which they are deployed. We keep the requirement for such systems under review for all our aircraft deployed on operations including the Nimrod MR2. This will continue to be the case for future aircraft, such as Nimrod MRA4. I am withholding further information as its release would, or would be likely to prejudice the capability, effectiveness or security of our armed forces.

RAF Halton

David Lidington: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many powered take-offs took place at RAF Halton in each calendar year since 2003; how many were carried out by each unit in each year; and if he will make a statement.

Bob Ainsworth: The annual number of powered take-offs from RAF Halton is capped at 16,300 per year as a result of a decision made by the then Under- Secretary of State for Defence in 2004. This figure has never been exceeded.
	The total number of powered take-offs from RAF Halton in 2003 was 14,143 and in 2004 was 13,293. A full breakdown by unit is not available for those years. The powered take-offs from RAF Halton for 2005 and 2006 broken down by unit are shown as follows:
	
		
			  Units  2005  2006 
			 613 Volunteer Gliding Squadron (613 VGS) 5,378 4,291 
			 Joint Services Gliding Centre (JSGC) 3,094 2,377 
			 RAF Gliding and Soaring Association (RAF GSA) 430 575 
			 Halton Aeroplane Club (HAC) 4,287 4,159 
			 Halton Microlight Club (HMC) 2,408 2,180 
			 Other 312 118 
			 Annual total 15,909 13,700

St. Malo Agreement

Keith Vaz: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on progress with achieving the objectives of the St. Malo Agreement.

Bob Ainsworth: The 1998 St. Malo text from the summit between the UK and French Governments declares the intentions of the two countries to enable the European Union to play a full role on the international stage. It concentrates particularly on what is now known as European Security and Defence Policy, while recognising the need for ESDP to develop in a way which is both supportive of and supported by NATO's crisis management activities.
	Since 1998 ESDP has developed considerably. It has enabled the EU to launch four peacekeeping operations: in the Democratic Republic of Congo (2003 and 2006); Macedonia (2003); and Bosnia (launched in December 2004), as well as numerous smaller civil-military operations. The current Bosnia operation took over from NATO's SFOR and has proven the efficacy of the Berlin Plus arrangements agreed in 2003 for EU access to NATO assets.
	Other successes include the establishment of the European Defence Agency in 2004 to drive forward capability development and improve defence/industrial co-operation; the continuing development of a capacity for military and joint civil/military planning, based on agreed consultation arrangements with NATO; and the establishment of full operating capability for the rapid-response Battle Groups initiative, achieved in January 2007.
	The Government are therefore fully satisfied with progress to date, and we will continue to play a leading role in further progress.

HOME DEPARTMENT

Animal Experiments: Violence

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department 
	(1)  what assessment she has made of the effectiveness of legislation to deter violent action against research facilities that use animals in their testing;
	(2)  if she will review the effectiveness of the law on the use of blackmail in the context of the activities of protesters against research facilities that use animals in their testing;
	(3)  how many convictions there have been for criminal acts for which responsibility was claimed by the Animal Liberation Front;
	(4)  what discussions she has had with zoos and aquariums on security protection from animal rights extremists.

Vernon Coaker: The Government are committed to eradicating the threat of animal rights extremism and has in place a robust interdepartmental strategy to achieve this. The strategy is centred on an improved law enforcement approach, with additional resources provided to the police to tackle animal rights extremism, a central police team set-up to drive forward police action nationally, and legislation enacted to protect animal research organisations. The strategy has been overseen by a Cabinet Committee which has been encouraged by the significant fall in illegal extremist activity, and the many significant convictions of animal rights extremists in the past 18 months, some for blackmail. A number of other animal rights extremists are awaiting trial and other major investigations remain ongoing.
	While the Government respect, support and will protect the right to peaceful protest, we are equally clear that it is wholly unacceptable that a very small number of animal extremists should mount campaigns of fear and intimidation in an attempt to stop individuals and companies going about their lawful and legitimate business whether it is connected with animal research, farming or zoos and aquariums. The Government will continue to drive and review the strategy to eradicate the extremist threat.

Animal Experiments: Violence

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if she will take steps to shut down the websites of the  (a) Animal Liberation Front and  (b) Animal Liberation Front Suppliers Group under the Terrorism Act 2006.

Vernon Coaker: The investigation and prosecution of offences under the Terrorism Act 2006 (including offences involving websites) are matters for the police and the Crown Prosecution Service respectively.

Antisocial Behaviour

David Evennett: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many incidents of anti-social behaviour were  (a) recorded and  (b) detected in each London borough in 2006-07.

Vernon Coaker: holding answer 8 October 2007
	The Home Office does not collect this information centrally.

Border Police

Paul Rowen: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the estimated cost of providing a unified border force is in  (a) 2007 and  (b) each of the next five years.

Liam Byrne: holding answer 8 October 2007
	In his announcement of 25 July, the Prime Minister commissioned the Cabinet Secretary to report to him on the stages ahead in implementation of a unified border force and whether there is a case for going further while ensuring value for money. The Cabinet Secretary is due to report in October.

Breathalysers

Jon Trickett: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what rules apply to mobile police units on  (a) carrying breathalyser kits and  (b) the procedure to be followed in deciding to take citizens to the police station for breathalysing when kits are not carried; and if she will make a statement.

Vernon Coaker: Breath test devices currently available for use outside police stations are screening devices, used for a preliminary test to obtain an indication whether a person's alcohol level is likely to be above the prescribed limit. If a person tests positive, he can be arrested, taken to a police station and required to take an evidential test.
	There is no statutory requirement on mobile police units to carry breath screening devices. Vehicles engaged in traffic law enforcement or responding to traffic incidents are however very likely to, and other vehicles may do. This is an operational equipment matter for the chief officer. If the vehicle does not have a screening device, one will normally be readily available and the person to be tested can be required to remain a reasonable length of time for it to arrive. Failure to co-operate with a preliminary test when the officer reasonably suspects there is alcohol in the person's body is an offence for which the person can be arrested.
	In addition to the offence of driving while over the prescribed limit, there is a separate offence of driving whilst under the influence of drink. An officer can arrest for this offence and subsequently require an evidential test provided he has reasonable grounds for suspecting the offence and an arrest is necessary for its prompt and effective investigation.
	Decisions as to arrest, etc are operational matters for the police on each occasion.

CCTV: Costs

Lynne Featherstone: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the cost to the public purse was of  (a) installing and  (b) maintaining CCTV surveillance in London in each of the last five years, broken down by borough.

Vernon Coaker: No data on the costs of publicly-funded CCTV cameras operating on a local or on a national level are centrally held by the Home Office.
	Previously, closed circuit television (CCTV) has been provided using a range of national and local funding streams. The principal fund has been the crime reduction programme from 1999 to 2003 which invested £170 million in CCTV schemes.
	Currently, crime reduction funding is allocated directly to local authorities through the Safer Stronger Communities Fund. These funds finance a variety of interventions, including CCTV, to tackle local crime priorities.
	Funding allocations are local decisions and are the responsibility of individual partnerships.

CCTV: London Boroughs

Lynne Featherstone: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many publicly-funded CCTV cameras were installed in each London borough in each of the last five years.

Vernon Coaker: No data on the number of publicly-funded CCTV cameras operating on a local or on a national level are centrally held by the Home Office.

Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre

Margaret Moran: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if she will list the  (a) internet service providers,  (b) social networking sites and  (c) other IT companies which have adopted the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre's report abuse mechanism.

Vernon Coaker: This information is not held centrally.
	However, the Home Secretary's Task Force for Child Protection on the internet has set up a working group which includes representatives from social network providers, law enforcement and children's charities. This group is looking at the safety issues for children caused by the development and growth of social networking sites and is developing good practice guidelines.

Deportation: Enforcement

Martin Linton: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how long she expects to take to consider the case of Mr. S.O. (Ref: O142114) who has applied for leave to remain under the 14-year concession but has been referred for enforcement action.

Liam Byrne: Gill Mortlock, north west regional director for Border and Immigration Agency wrote to my hon. Friend on 21 September 2007.

Drugs

Paul Flynn: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans the Government have to commission research into the effect of changing the classification of illegal drugs on  (a) levels of drugs misuse and  (b) levels of drug-related harm.

Vernon Coaker: The Government have no plans at this time to commission any research into the effect of changing the classification of illegal drugs on levels of drug misuse and/or levels of drug-related harm. The Government undertake several surveys to monitor levels of drug misuse and drug-related harm but these are predicated on the ABC classification system.

Drugs: Peterborough

Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how much of the Young People's Substance Misuse Partnership funding was allocated to Peterborough constituency in each of the last five years; and if she will make a statement.

Vernon Coaker: holding answer 8 October 2007
	 The Department of Health, Home Office, Department for Children, Schools and Families (formerly the Department for Education and Skills), and the Youth Justice Board brought together substance misuse budgets for young people into one grant, the Young People Substance Misuse Partnership Grant (YPSMPG) at a national level in 2004-05. This funding is made available in addition to mainstream funding streams.
	The allocations made to Peterborough since 2004-05 are shown in the following table.
	The change in levels of funding in 2007-08 against 2006-07 need to be placed in the context of record levels of investment over the last eight years. This year's allocation to Peterborough is over 30 per cent. greater than when YPSMPG allocations were introduced. Where there is a local need, the pooled treatment budget for drug treatment services can be used to provide additional funding for young people's treatment.
	
		
			   Allocation (£) 
			 2004-05 216,408 
			 2005-06 303,323 
			 2006-07 308,951 
			 2007-08 284,440

Genetics: Databases

Jon Trickett: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department 
	(1)  whether DNA and fingerprints may be taken from individuals who are being asked to take a breathalyser test;
	(2)  whether individuals not subject to charges but who were subject to a breathalyser test are entitled to  (a) decline when asked to submit to fingerprinting and the taking of DNA and  (b) request that the DNA and fingerprints should be destroyed;
	(3)  what rules apply to the taking of fingerprints and DNA samples when individuals are asked to take a breathalyser test  (a) at a police station and  (b) in their vehicle; what differences there are between the rules in both cases; and if she will make a statement.

Vernon Coaker: The Road Traffic Act 1988 gives a constable power to require a driver to provide a breath specimen for a preliminary breath test. This is generally taken at the roadside. Under section 6D of the 1988 Act, the driver may be arrested if as a result of the test, the constable suspects that that his/her breath or blood alcohol level exceeds the prescribed limit or if for any reason the driver does not cooperate with the test and the constable suspects alcohol (or drugs) to be in the driver's body.
	The purpose of this arrest is to enable a constable to require the driver to provide an evidential sample which, depending on the circumstances, may be breath, blood or urine, to be analysed to determine whether the driver may have committed a specific drink/driving offence under the Road Traffic Act.
	The taking and retention of fingerprints and DNA for the purposes of investigating other offences and for identifying suspects are governed by the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE). Under PACE, fingerprints and DNA cannot be taken without consent unless the driver has been arrested for, or charged with, a specific recordable offence, for example, driving with excess alcohol or when unfit to drive through drink or drugs, failing without reasonable excuse to take a preliminary breath test or failing without reasonable excuse to provide an evidential specimen for analysis. Biometric data under PACE is taken at a police station.
	Police may retain fingerprints and samples lawfully taken under PACE. It is a matter for the chief officer for each force area to determine whether or not samples or fingerprints should be retained.

Police Stations

David Davis: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many police stations were operational in each police force area in 2006.

Jacqui Smith: The management of the police estate and allocation of resources are matters for each police authority and the chief officer, who are responsible for assessing local needs.

Police: Firearms

Mark Pritchard: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many  (a) accidental and  (b) negligent discharges of firearms by police officers were reported to police forces in England and Wales in 2007.

Vernon Coaker: This information is not collected centrally by the Home Office. However, police forces in England and Wales are encouraged to report any instances of accidental or negligent discharges of firearms by police officers to the Association of Chief Police Officers. The Association of Chief Police Officers aims to share lessons learned from these incidents with all forces to prevent them occurring again, and will consider changes to policy where appropriate at a national level.

Police: Fraud

Harry Cohen: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what mechanisms are in place to ensure the accountability of the City of London police force for its handling of business fraud cases; how many cases it successfully brought to prosecution in each of the last five years; and how many current cases it is dealing with.

Vernon Coaker: The Police Authority for the City of London Police is the Corporation of London's Court of Common Council. However, decisions on individual cases are operational matters and solely the responsibility of the Commissioner of Police for the City of London.
	Data showing the number of defendants proceeded against and found guilty for Fraud and Forgery offences in the City of London police force area from 2001 to 2005 is shown in the table. The Court Proceedings database held by the Office for Criminal Justice Reform is unable to separate business fraud cases from other types of fraud and forgery.
	I understand from the City of London Police that their Economic Crime Department, which has lead force status for the south east and which investigates all types of economic crime, has an average active caseload of around 300 investigations.
	
		
			  Number of defendants proceeded against at magistrates courts and found guilty at all courts for Fraud and Forgery offences, in the City of London police force area, 2001 to 2005( 1,2) 
			   Proceeded against  Found guilty 
			 2001 184 90 
			 2002 210 89 
			 2003 324 104 
			 2004 244 131 
			 2005 198 107 
			 (1) These data are on the principal offence basis. (2) Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts and police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.  Source: RDS-OCJR, Ministry of Justice

Police: Scotland

Andrew MacKinlay: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what discussions are being conducted with the Scottish Executive on the impact on, and changes necessary to, its police forces and law enforcement arrangements consequent on the Government's proposal to create a new police or border force working in the United Kingdom's ports of entry; and if she will make a statement.

Liam Byrne: The Scottish Executive has discussed with the Cabinet Secretary's border review team potential implications for Scotland of the introduction of a unified border force, including potential implications for police and law enforcement arrangements.

Prisoners: Drugs

Paul Flynn: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what research the Government have  (a) undertaken,  (b) commissioned and  (c) reviewed into the cost-effectiveness of imprisoning dependent drug users for non-violent offences.

Vernon Coaker: There has been no Home Office or Ministry of Justice research commissioned specifically to look directly at the cost-effectiveness of imprisoning dependent drug users for non-violent offences. However, there is currently an extensive programme of research planned for the forthcoming year that will evaluate the impact of specific CJS/NOMS interventions on re-offending and what value for money they offer. The output from this research will help shape priorities across the CJS in terms of where resources are likely to be most effectively targeted for protecting the public and reducing re-offending.
	In addition, findings from a new study of drug treatment in the community (DTORS) will be published later in 2007. This study includes dependent users in treatment who have been referred via both CJS and non-CJS routes. Information on drug treatment in the community can provide valuable lessons to be learnt for treating dependent drug users in prison and the cost effectiveness of such treatment.
	Finally, I refer the hon. Member to 9 March 2007,  Official Repor t, column 2315W, in which the former Home Office Minister—my hon. Friend the Member for Bradford, South (Mr. Sutcliffe)—outlined the programme of research in place to evaluate CJS/NOMS interventions on re-offending; and 9 July 2007,  Official Report, column 1319W, in which the Home Secretary outlined some of the many measures in place to address drug-related crime.

Robbery: Greater London

Lynne Featherstone: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many  (a) robberies and  (b) burglaries were reported in each London constituency in each of the last five years; and how many of these resulted in convictions.

Vernon Coaker: Data at specific constituency level are not available. The numbers of robbery and burglary offences recorded by the police, from 2002-03 to 2006-07, for each Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership (CDRP) in London are given in the following tables.
	The following tables show the number of defendants found guilty at all courts for burglary and robbery in Greater London for the years 2001 to 2005, and is taken from the court proceedings database held by the Office for Criminal Justice Reform. Data for 2006 will be available in November this year.
	Caution must be taken in comparing recorded crime statistics with convictions statistics as these are from two different databases and recorded in quite different ways. Recorded crime data is provided on a financial year basis and counts offences whereas court proceedings data are on a calendar year basis and count offenders. Therefore, these two separate data-sets are not directly comparable.
	
		
			  Table 1: Robbery offences recorded in each London Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership 
			  CDRP  2002-03  2003-04  2004-05  2005-06  2006-07 
			 City of London 45 50 42 39 41 
			 Barking and Dagenham 686 802 739 775 805 
			 Barnet 1,059 1,082 1,211 1,226 1,063 
			 Bexley 339 388 402 473 448 
			 Brent 1,795 1,807 2,084 2,355 2,144 
			 Bromley 702 863 729 901 1,115 
			 Camden 1,765 1,334 1,315 1,260 1,597 
			 City of Westminster 1,752 1,437 1,505 1,577 1,756 
			 Croydon 1,888 1,771 1,496 1,845 1,829 
			 Ealing 1,823 1,473 1,565 2,012 2,359 
			 Enfield 1,072 1,211 1,143 1,454 1,507 
			 Greenwich 693 1,083 1,172 1,229 1,479 
			 Hackney 2,466 2,441 1,926 1,856 1,685 
			 Hammersmith and Fulham 1,271 1,146 1,386 1,285 1,172 
			 Haringey 2,166 1,903 1,430 2,024 1,946 
			 Harrow 613 624 699 862 769 
			 Havering 479 512 442 459 549 
			 Hillingdon 588 512 593 876 974 
			 Hounslow 954 820 712 841 869 
			 Islington 1,664 1,397 1,244 1,412 1,488 
			 Kensington and Chelsea 673 794 792 906 787 
			 Kingston upon Thames 305 292 257 337 302 
			 Lambeth 4,017 3,298 3,021 2,998 2,911 
			 Lewisham 1,627 1,924 1,783 2,304 2,635 
			 Merton 684 584 459 625 598 
			 Newham 2,150 2,242 1,939 2,501 2,520 
			 Redbridge 1,096 1,188 1,241 1,329 1,353 
			 Richmond upon Thames 291 257 376 455 408 
			 Southwark 2,220 2,295 2,406 2,981 2,695 
			 Sutton 276 354 231 411 413 
			 Tower Hamlets 1,790 1,568 1,457 1,675 1,908 
			 Waltham Forest 1,791 1,655 1,796 2,392 1,954 
			 Wandsworth 1,788 1,574 1,475 1,668 1,724 
			 Total London Area 42,528 40,681 39,068 45,343 45,803 
		
	
	
		
			  Table 2: Burglary offences recorded in each London Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership 
			  CDRP  2002-03  2003-04  2004-05  2005-06  2006-07 
			 City of London 444 454 501 366 402 
			 Barking and Dagenham 2,012 2,240 2,175 1,921 2,117 
			 Barnet 4,039 3,978 4,045 4,363 3,904 
			 Bexley 2,341 2,226 1,986 2,366 2,076 
			 Brent 3,859 4,062 3,987 3,904 3,330 
			 Bromley 3,596 3,472 3,776 3,926 3,588 
			 Camden 5,884 4,843 4,171 4,108 4,322 
			 City of Westminster 5,264 4,296 4,497 4,158 3,801 
			 Croydon 4,115 3,769 3,230 3,582 3,464 
			 Ealing 4,543 4,375 4,350 4,999 3,957 
			 Enfield 4,301 3,865 3,528 3,844 3,638 
			 Greenwich 2,986 3,080 2,970 3,209 3,241 
			 Hackney 4,807 4,327 3,897 3,547 2,687 
			 Hammersmith and Fulham 3,089 2,827 3,023 3,052 2,732 
			 Haringey 4,356 4,115 4,084 3,841 3,559 
			 Harrow 2,736 2,626 2,178 2,446 1,959 
			 Havering 2,386 2,161 2,315 2,453 2,511 
			 Hillingdon 3,569 3,183 3,143 3,137 3,182 
			 Hounslow 3,374 3,450 2,969 2,982 2,594 
			 Islington 4,429 3,957 3,681 3,683 3,728 
			 Kensington and Chelsea 2,512 2,576 2,580 2,444 2,182 
			 Kingston upon Thames 985 939 984 1,188 1,038 
			 Lambeth 5,694 4,980 4,150 3,884 3,685 
			 Lewisham 3,708 3,837 3,778 3,524 3,579 
			 Merton 1,930 2,034 1,764 1,796 1,828 
			 Newham 3,494 3,398 3,410 4,112 3,371 
			 Redbridge 2,974 2,990 3,058 3,282 3,053 
			 Richmond upon Thames 2,120 1,787 2,017 2,395 2,085 
			 Southwark 4,885 4,556 4,411 4,143 4,087 
			 Sutton 1,446 1,397 1,429 1,480 1,451 
			 Tower Hamlets 3,567 3,023 3,070 3,467 2,890 
			 Waltham Forest 3,812 3,284 3,144 3,131 3,116 
			 Wandsworth 4,547 3,664 3,616 3,108 3,943 
			 Total London Area 113,804 105,771 101,917 103,841 97,100 
		
	
	
		
			  Table 3: Number of defendants found guilty at all courts for Burglary and Robbery, Greater London, 2001-05( 1,2) 
			  Police force area  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005 
			  Burglary  
			 City of London 35 25 25 20 29 
			 Metropolitan Police 2,977 3,339 3,207 3,075 3,031 
			 Greater London 3,012 3,364 3,232 3,095 3,060 
			   
			  Robbery  
			 City of London 9 1 3 8 2 
			 Metropolitan Police 1,767 1,936 1,835 2,024 1,953 
			 Greater London 1,776 1,937 1,838 2,032 1,955 
			 (1) These data are provided on the principal offence basis.  (2) Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the police. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.   Source:  RDS—Office for Criminal Justice Reform—Ministry of Justice

Security Industry Authority: Wales

David Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many enforcement offices of the Security Industry Authority are operational in the force area of North Wales Police.

Vernon Coaker: The Security Industry Authority (SIA) does not have regional offices. The SIA has an intelligence team and a network of 41 investigators across England, Wales and Scotland. SIA investigation teams cover specific areas throughout England, Wales and Scotland and the structure of the SIA investigation teams allows resources to be directed to that area as required.

Security Industry Authority: Wales

David Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department 
	(1)  how many convictions under the Private Security Industry Act 2001 for working in a licensable role without a Security Industry Agency licence were obtained against individuals resident in the force area of North Wales police in each of the last three years;
	(2)  how many convictions under the Private Security Industry Act 2001 for supplying unlicensed security staff were obtained against individuals resident in the force area of North Wales police in each of the last three years.

Vernon Coaker: In 2004 and 2005, there were no convictions under sections 3 and 5 of the Private Security Industry Act 2001 at any courts in the North Wales police force area either for working in a licensable role without a Security Industry Agency licence or for supplying unlicensed security staff.
	The data for 2006 will be available in November 2007. (The statistics collected are broken down into locations where convictions were secured and not the addresses of individuals resident in the force area.)

Security Industry Authority: Wales

David Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many  (a) front line and  (b) non-front line licences granted under the Private Security Industry Act 2001 are held by individuals resident in the force area of North Wales Police.

Vernon Coaker: As of 1 October 2007, 236,129 front line licences and 5,677 non-front line licences have been granted in total across England, Wales and Scotland.
	The statistics collected by the SIA are broken down into licensable sectors, not geographical areas.

Tesco: Extortion

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what representations she has received from Tesco supermarket on threatening letters received from animal rights activists; and if she will make a statement.

Vernon Coaker: The Home Office has received no representations from Tesco supermarket on threatening letters received from animal rights activists. However, the Government are committed to working in close co-operation with law enforcement agencies and any targets of animal rights extremism to eradicate the threat of extremists, building on the significant fall in illegal extremist activity, and the many significant convictions of animal rights extremists in the past 18 months.

DUCHY OF LANCASTER

Centre of Excellence for Charitable Giving

Greg Clark: To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster whether the winners of the contract to host the Centre of Excellence for Charitable Giving will also be able to bid for research work commissioned by the Centre.

Phil Hope: The Centre for Charitable Giving and Philanthropy is being commissioned on the basis of a published specification that identified key research areas.
	A small proportion of the overall budget is currently uncommitted and has been set aside by the funders to support the commissioning of further research over the course of the centre.
	It will be open to centre staff and others to bid for currently uncommitted funds, and to any additional funds secured to support appropriate further research projects.
	Appropriate governance arrangements will be made to ensure that decisions on any further research supported by existing uncommitted funds, and by any additional funds secured, will be based on proposals' scientific excellence, in line with ESRC practice.

Charitable Donations

Greg Clark: To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what target the Government has set to increase charitable donations in real terms over the 10 year period to 2014; and what steps the Government is taking to monitor and report on progress towards meeting this target.

Phil Hope: A Generous Society, the Government's charitable giving strategy, was published in November 2005, and sets out our plans for working in partnership with the third sector to foster a deeper culture of planned, regular and tax-efficient giving. The Citizenship Survey will be used to determine the impact of the measures adopted.

Departments: ICT

Jennifer Willott: To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster how many new  (a) laptops,  (b) mobile telephones and  (c) personal digital assistant devices his Department bought for the use of new departmental Ministers in the Cabinet Office following each Cabinet reshuffle since 1997; and if he will make a statement.

Gillian Merron: The information is not held centrally and therefore is available only at disproportionate cost.

Departments: Public Bodies

Oliver Letwin: To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he will list his Department's  (a) executive agencies,  (b) executive Non-departmental public bodies (NDPBs),  (c) advisory NDPBs,  (d) tribunal NDPBs,  (e) trading funds and  (f) public corporations for each financial year since 2005-06.

Edward Miliband: A list of the non-departmental public bodies and agencies sponsored by the Cabinet Office can be found in the Cabinet Office departmental reports which are available in the Libraries of the House for the reference of Members. They are also available from the Cabinet Office website at:
	http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/about_the_cabinet_office/reports.asp

Gift Aid

Greg Clark: To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what steps were taken by the Office of the Third Sector to inform the voluntary sector and the general public about the reduction in the rate of gift aid that resulted from the change in income tax rates in the last Budget; and when those steps were taken.

Phil Hope: The then Chancellor and the Minister for the third sector discussed the need to further build on the increase in the amount of money directly benefiting third sector organisations, which has increased from £135 million in 1996-97 to £750 million for 2005-06. Measures to increase take-up of Gift Aid and ensure greater awareness of how to give in a tax-efficient way have been widely consulted on this year, ahead of any changes coming into effect on income tax levels. Findings from the consultation will be made available in due course.

Information Officers: Charity Commission

David Gauke: To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster how many press officers are employed by the Charity Commission.

Phil Hope: The Charity Commission employs six staff with press office responsibilities.

Information Officers: Independent Complaints Reviewer to the Charity Commission

Andrew MacKay: To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster how many press officers are employed by the Independent Complaints Reviewer to the Charity Commission.

Phil Hope: The Independent Complaints Reviewer to the Charity Commission does not employ any press officers.

Non-Departmental Public Bodies: Political Powers

David Amess: To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster 
	(1)  how many people are members of quangos in England and Wales; and what the total cost of quangos in England and Wales was in each of the last 10 years;
	(2)  what assessments are made of the political party memberships of individuals appointed to quangos and commissions in England and Wales; what reforms are planned; and if he will make a statement;
	(3)  which public bodies are required to report to Parliament;
	(4)  how many and what percentage of the  (a) paid and  (b) unpaid appointments made to non-departmental public bodies since 1 May 1997 were (i) members and (ii) declared supporters of the Labour Party.

Edward Miliband: Information on membership and expenditure of public bodies is published annually by the Cabinet Office. Figures covering the period 1997 to 2006 are available on the civil service website (www.civilservice.gov.uk). Departments are in the process of publishing information for 2006-07 and a summary will be published by the Cabinet Office when publication by Departments is completed.
	Information on the political activity of those appointed to the boards of public bodies is collected by the independent Commissioner for Public Appointments and published in her annual report. The Commissioner's annual report for 2006-07 was published on 8 October 2007. Copies have been placed in the Libraries of the House.

Olympic Games: Greater London

Mark Hoban: To ask the Minister for the Olympics pursuant to the answer of 18 July 2007,  Official Report, column 363W, on the Olympic Games: Greater London, whether the role of KPMG changed once they stopped providing advice to her Department and started advising the Olympic Delivery Authority in July 2006.

Tessa Jowell: Yes. KPMG were contracted to provide advice to the Department on the development of the Olympic budget until July 2006. Following this, KPMG were contracted by the Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA) to provide the ODA with ongoing advice on their cost estimates. KPMG have continued in this role.

Olympic Games: Greater London

Mark Hoban: To ask the Minister for the Olympics pursuant to the answer of 18 July 2007,  Official Report, column 363W, on the Olympic Games: Greater London, what documents KPMG provided to her Department when they stopped providing it with advice on the cost of the Olympics in July 2006.

Tessa Jowell: Other than an invoice for their work up until July 2006, our records show that KPMG did not provide the Department with any further documents.

Olympic Games: Greater London

Mark Hoban: To ask the Minister for the Olympics 
	(1)  pursuant to the answer of 9 July 2007,  Official Report, column 1292W, on the Olympic Games: Greater London, how the cost review continued its work after 25 April;
	(2)  on what areas of the Olympics budget the cost review continued to work after 25 April.

Tessa Jowell: After 25 April 2006, the cost review continued its work by analysing and validating the cost estimates and risks underpinning all aspects of the cost package that was subsequently announced to the House on 15 March 2007. This included: Olympic Park and venues; Olympic infrastructure and regeneration; and security.

Olympic Games: Greater London

Mark Hoban: To ask the Minister for the Olympics pursuant to the answer of 9 July 2007,  Official Report, column 1292W, on the Olympic Games: Greater London, which  (a) ministerial and  (b) official groups have taken forward the work of the Cost Review Group since 25 April.

Tessa Jowell: I, and departmental officials, held a number of bilateral meetings with key stakeholders to take forward the cost review work from 25 April 2006 until my statement of 15 March 2007,  Official Report, column 450. No specific ministerial group or official groups were required.
	Following my announcement of 15 March 2007, Ministers have established a Funders Group, supported by officials, to continually assess the Olympic budget and agree any further calls on the contingency provision.

Olympic Games: Greater London

Michael Fabricant: To ask the Minister for the Olympics 
	(1)  what her policy is on the use of the Red Arrows RAF flying team during the 2012 Olympics; and if she will make a statement;
	(2)  if she will make a statement on the involvement of the Red Arrows in the Olympic ceremonies in 2012.

Tessa Jowell: Newspaper claims that the Government have banned or advised against the Red Arrows' involvement in the opening ceremony or any other celebrations associated with the 2012 Games are completely untrue and unfounded.
	The London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games and Paralympic Games (LOCOG) is responsible for deciding what to include in the opening ceremony and other celebrations, and no decisions have yet been taken about the content. The Red Arrows have already played a memorable role in the celebrations, when they flew over Trafalgar Square to mark London winning the Games.

ENVIRONMENT FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS

Agriculture: Subsidies

Julia Goldsworthy: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if he will estimate  (a) the number and  (b) average value of payments made by the Rural Payments Agency in respect of the Common Agricultural Policy in excess of (i) £150,000, (ii) £200,000, (iii) £250,000 and (iv) 300,000; and if he will make a statement.

Jonathan R Shaw: A breakdown of individual CAP payments exceeding £150,000 made to customers over the 2006-07 exchequer year is reflected in the table.
	The table includes payments made for expenditure both fully and partly funded by the EC.
	This table is based on analysis of all individual payments to customers exceeding £150,000 over the period 1 April 2006 through to 31 March 2007.
	
		
			  Value of payment  Number of payments  Average value of payments (£) 
			 Over £150,000 1,647 252,826.81 
			 Over £200,000 801 338,504.48 
			 Over £250,000 457 425,872.31 
			 Over £300,000 295 508,639.72

Agriculture: Subsidies

John Mann: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs 
	(1)  how much has been paid in agricultural subsidies in Bassetlaw constituency in each year since 2005;
	(2)  how many farmers have been paid agricultural subsidies in Bassetlaw constituency in each of the last 10 years.

Jonathan R Shaw: The information requested is not currently available, but I have asked officials to collate the data. I will write to the hon. Member with the information in due course and copies will be placed in the Libraries of the House.

Animals: Disease Control

Christopher Huhne: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if he will assess whether there is any continuing risk to the farming industry from a failure of bio-security at the  (a) Compton and  (b) Pirbright sites of the Institute for Animal Health.

Jonathan R Shaw: All the recommendations in the reports by the Health and Safety Executive and Professor Spratt applying to the Government, the Institute of Animal Health and Merial have been accepted and already have been, or are being, implemented. In addition, as set out in the Government Statement of 7 September 2007 in response to these investigations, we have taken action that goes beyond these recommendations. These measures ensure the highest level of bio-security at Pirbright and at other laboratories working with specified animal pathogens.

Animals: Disease Control

Christopher Huhne: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs which viruses dangerous to animal or human health have been subject to experimentation at the  (a) Pirbright and  (b) Compton sites of the Institute for Animal Health.

Jonathan R Shaw: DEFRA, as licensor and regulator under the Specified Animal Pathogens Order (SAPO) 1998 have issued the Institute for Animal Health with licences for both the Pirbright and Compton sites to hold category 3 and 4 viruses under that Order. Among the viruses covered by the Order are: bluetongue, African horse sickness, foot and mouth disease, African swine fever, avian influenza, avian oncogenic viruses, coronaviruses and morbiliviruses. It is not possible, for reasons of commercial confidentiality, to give details of specific viruses that have been subject to experimentation.

Birds: Malta

David Anderson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what discussions he has had with his Maltese counterpart on reducing the shooting of turtle doves and quails during spring 2008 in that country.

Joan Ruddock: No such discussions have taken place.
	Council Directive 79/409/EEC on the Conservation of Wild Birds (the "Birds Directive") lays down rules for the protection, management and control of all wild birds. Member states are required to introduce legislation in line with the birds directive's requirements and ensure it is applied effectively.
	The hunting of turtle dove and quail in Malta is permitted under the birds directive. However, during periods of reproduction or during their return to rearing grounds, hunting may only be permitted under derogation and if the strict conditions under Article 9 of the birds directive are met. This is a matter for the Maltese authorities to determine.

Departments: Publicity

Mark Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what his Department's projected spending is on advertising and promotional campaigns for  (a) 2007-08 and  (b) 2008-09, broken down by cost relating to (i) television, (ii) radio and (iii) print media.

Jonathan R Shaw: The Department's central spend on campaigns and marketing through the Communications Directorate and the Citizen and Public Engagement Programme is £7,160,000. Within this, the projected spend on advertising and promotional activity is as follows:
	
		
			  £ 
			   2007-08  2008-09 
			 Television 1,670,300 — 
			 Radio 45,000 — 
			 Print media 760,500 — 
		
	
	The projected spend for 2008-09 has not yet been created.
	The Department does not maintain central records of other communications expenditure outside of the Communications Directorate.

Environment Agency: Manpower

Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many staff were working for the Environment Agency in Peterborough in each year since 1997.

Phil Woolas: A breakdown of Environment Agency staff based in Peterborough from 2000 to the present day is provided in the following table.
	Details of staff numbers in earlier years is not available due to limited reporting functions prior to 2000.
	
		
			   Staff 
			 2000 272 
			 2001 268 
			 2002 354 
			 2003 368 
			 2004 453 
			 2005 478 
			 2006 504 
			 2007 498 
		
	
	Staff are based at Kingfisher house and Aqua house, Peterborough.

Farms: Mushrooms

John Mann: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many visits Ministers have made to mushroom farms since 1991.

Jonathan R Shaw: This information could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

Farms: Mushrooms

John Mann: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many prosecutions there have been of mushroom farms under the Environment Protection Act 1990.

Jonathan R Shaw: I am not aware of any such prosecutions having been undertaken since DEFRA began collecting data on prosecutions in 2001-02.

Farms: Mushrooms

John Mann: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many mushroom farms there are in England.

Jonathan R Shaw: According to the June Survey of Agriculture, the number of registered holdings in England specialising in mushroom production at June 2006 was 43. These are holdings where mushroom growing is the predominant activity. Estimates are based on a sample survey and are, therefore, subject to a degree of sampling error.

Flood Control

Anne McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what plans he has to review the cost benefit analysis system for allocating funds to flood risk areas.

Phil Woolas: Economic analysis is undertaken as part of project appraisal. It provides an aid to determining the most appropriate solution to a problem, to ensure that the funds secured from general taxation are invested for the benefit of the nation as a whole. It is an effective tool for comparing the impacts of flooding with the costs of reducing risk. Social, health and environmental impacts can often be valued and included in the analysis where they are significant.
	Following public consultation, a set of outcome measures has been developed to provide greater clarity on what policies and funding for flood and coastal erosion risk management are intended to achieve. One of the agreed measures will show the overall benefits of flood and coastal erosion risk management activities in monetary terms. The measures will be used to set targets progressively during the period covered by the 2007 Comprehensive Spending Review, starting with the capital programme in 2008-09.

Flood Control: Agriculture

Anne McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what recent discussions he has had with farmers regarding managing land use for flood prevention in flood risk areas.

Phil Woolas: As part of DEFRA's 'Making Space for Water' strategy, there are two projects investigating the role that rural land use and land management can play in managing flood risk at the farm and catchment scale. These projects are Catchment Scale Land—Use Management (HA6) and Land Management Practices (HA7). In the development of these projects, the Environment Agency has been working with the National Farmers Union and the Country Land and Business Association.
	At a local level, the Environment Agency is developing Catchment Flood Management Plans, which consider the role of land use, in consultation with all interested parties.

Floods

Geoffrey Clifton-Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what total funds were available for flood recovery across all Government Departments for  (a) the county of Gloucestershire,  (b) the borough of Tewkesbury,  (c) the city of Gloucester and  (d) the Cotswolds district.

Phil Woolas: To date, the Government have made available a significant package of £57 million to support areas affected by the flooding of June and July 2007. The county of Gloucestershire was allocated £2,623,000 of flood recovery grant, which includes £623,500 for the borough of Tewkesbury, £646,500 for the city of Gloucester and £623,500 for the Cotswold district council. Gloucestershire county council was allocated £1,007,900 from the Department for Children, Schools and Families. None of the other local authorities within Gloucestershire provide education or children's services and thus were not eligible for this funding.
	The Department for Transport has written to Gloucestershire saying that they will be allocated at least £10 million for highways works and there are ongoing discussions about further funding.
	The Regional Development Agency with responsibility for Gloucestershire announced a £2 million flood recovery package for the region. Eligible businesses are able to claim up to a maximum of £2,500. As at 4 October 2007, 455 grant offers had been made, totalling £1,030,000 and 239 of these offers have been claimed, totalling £526,000 paid out by the Regional Development Agency.
	This is additional money to that available under the Bellwin scheme. The scheme provides emergency financial assistance from the Government to local authorities, to help meet the uninsurable costs of immediate action to safeguard life or property or prevent severe inconvenience to inhabitants in the case of an emergency or disaster. In recognition of the exceptional nature of the recent flooding, special arrangements apply for these schemes. We have significantly extended the period for which the affected authorities can claim for eligible costs and increased the proportion of costs they can receive to 100 per cent. above the threshold.

Floods: Landfill Tax

Anne McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment has been made of the increase in landfill tax in Hull, following recent flooding in the area and the need to dispose of damaged items; and if he will make a statement.

Joan Ruddock: Landfill tax provides an important incentive for local authorities to achieve more sustainable waste management.
	Hull has estimated that a relatively small increase in municipal waste arisings will occur, because of the flooding. This is within the normal range of variations in annual waste arisings. It should not have a long-term or significant impact on waste management costs.
	DEFRA has not assessed specifically the increase in landfill tax in Hull following the flooding in the area.

Foot and Mouth Disease: New Forest

Desmond Swayne: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what contingency plans exist to deal with an outbreak of foot and mouth disease amongst commoners' stock in the New Forest; and if he will make a statement.

Jonathan R Shaw: DEFRA's contingency plan for exotic animal diseases is in three parts:
	i. Information on specific animal diseases. This is available on the DEFRA website and ensures that those interested always have access to up to date information.
	ii. Emergency preparedness. This provides details of how DEFRA has prepared for an outbreak, including some information on the diseases and what action the Department has taken to be ready,
	iii. Framework Response plan. This is an operational manual for those involved in managing handling an outbreak and, whilst it is in the public domain, it is primarily for officials who have responsibility in an outbreak.
	The plan is reviewed annually in accordance with the requirements of the Animal Health Act 2002. The current version of the plan was laid before Parliament on 13 December 2006. The plan (together with the additional bluetongue contingency plan) is being used in the current outbreaks of foot and mouth disease and bluetongue.
	DEFRA encourages owners or keepers of stock kept on common land, such as the New Forest, to undertake enhanced surveillance for signs of disease amongst their animals. If they have any concerns they should be reported to their local animal health office.

Landfill

David Lidington: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if he will make it his policy to allocate increased landfill allowance trading scheme targets to local authorities which are in sustainable communities growth plan areas.

Joan Ruddock: Under the landfill allowances trading scheme (LATS), allowances have been determined for waste disposal authorities (WDAs) each year from 2004-05 to 2019-20 to provide local authorities with greater certainty for long-term planning. The total number of allowances is limited to ensure that England can meet its share of the European Landfill Directive targets for biodegradable municipal waste. It is not possible to increase the allowances available to individual WDAs without breaching the national targets or reducing the allowances available to other local authorities.
	LATS provides flexibility to help local authorities cope with increasing populations through trading, banking and borrowing of allowances. This is intended to give all WDAs every opportunity to avoid becoming liable to a financial penalty for failure to comply with LATS obligations.

Landfill: Recycling

Jo Swinson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what steps he has taken to investigate the capture and use of gas produced from landfill for  (a) use as a fuel and  (b) electricity generation.

Joan Ruddock: There are currently 324 landfill sites in the UK that utilise methane to generate electricity. The technology for this is well established, with the first site in the UK to generate electricity from landfill gas starting to operate in the 1980s.
	The production of electricity from landfill gas is incentivised through the Renewables Obligation (RO), which places an obligation on licensed electricity suppliers to source a proportion of electricity from renewable sources.

Packaging: Recycling

John Pugh: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what financial incentives there are for small to medium sized firms to recycle  (a) materials and  (b) packaging.

Joan Ruddock: The Landfill Tax acts as a financial incentive for all businesses, not just small to medium sized firms, to encourage recycling of materials. The Business Resource Efficiency and Waste (BREW) Programme (funded from Landfill Tax) allows businesses to receive free and independent support and advice to help them increase their profitability by sending less waste to landfill and recycling more.
	There are no specific financial incentives for small to medium sized companies to recycle packaging. However, the Packaging Regulations do provide an incentive for businesses to reduce and minimise the amount of packaging used. This is because they are obliged to recover and recycle a specified amount of packaging waste; determined, in part, by the amount of packaging they handle. A producer using less packaging, can reduce the costs incurred under these regulations.

Pirbright Laboratory: Standards

Christopher Huhne: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs 
	(1)  whether  (a) Mr. John Manser and  (b) any other officials responsible for inspecting, regulating and licensing the Institute for Animal Health site and the Merial site at Pirbright were made aware of the issues raised in the letter from the Merial site director of 20 July 2004;
	(2)  whether any Minister in his Department was made aware following the letter to the Department from the Merial site director of 20 July 2004 of the need to renew the old effluent drain between the restricted area of Merial and the Institute of Animal Health effluent treatment plant.

Jonathan R Shaw: Officials, but not Ministers, were made aware of the issues raised in the letter from the Merial site director of 20 July 2004. The letter sought DEFRA's views, as licensor and regulator under the Specified Animal Pathogens Order 1998, on the proposed specification of the replacement pipe. No questions over the integrity of the pipe in relation to requirements under that Order were raised in the letter, previously or subsequently, until the DEFRA-commissioned Health and Safety Executive inspection in August this year.

Plastics: Recycling

John Pugh: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment the Government has made of the volume of plastic recycled in the United Kingdom compared to the volume shipped abroad.

Joan Ruddock: Most material collected in the UK for recycling is processed in this country.
	The total amount of plastic waste arising in the UK is estimated at 5.9 million tonnes a year. The Environment Agency estimates that the level of plastic exports by 2006 would have reached 440,000 tonnes a year. Figures on the amount of plastic recycled in the UK are not held centrally.

Plastics: Recycling

John Pugh: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what discussions have been held with the plastics industry to ensure that the range of polymers and products does not create obstacles to recycling.

Joan Ruddock: No formal discussions have been held.
	Government cannot oblige producers to use specific materials in their packaging or products. In reality all polymers are recyclable, although in some instances it is not currently economic to do so. The Government are making it easier for local authorities to plan for, and put in place, the waste infrastructure that is needed on the ground in order to re-process more recyclable materials.

Plastics: Recycling

John Pugh: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment the Government have made of incentives which could be adopted to encourage local authorities to promote kerbside and other methods of plastic recycling.

Joan Ruddock: Additional funding for local authorities, including through the private finance initiative, has led to a major increase in kerbside recycling facilities. The Government's Waste Strategy for England 2007 set a new national target for reducing the amount of household wastes not reused, recycled or composted, and increased national targets for the percentage of household waste recycled and composted. It also set a target for the amount of municipal waste recovered.
	Technical advice on the collection of plastics for recycling is available for local authorities from the Waste Resources Action programme (WRAP).

Radioactive Wastes

David Taylor: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what plans he has to meet with representatives of English, Scottish or Welsh local authorities to discuss the disposal of radioactive waste; and if he will make a statement.

Phil Woolas: holding answer 8 October 2007
	I spoke at the Local Government Association conference 'The long-term management of radioactive wastes—the role of Local Government' on 6 September 2007. There are also regular meetings between DEFRA and the Nuclear Legacy Advisory Forum (NuLeAF), the special interest group of the Local Government Association, to discuss radioactive waste issues.
	The Government are consulting publicly on a framework for implementing the geological disposal of higher activity radioactive waste. In launching the consultation document on 25 June 2007, DEFRA Ministers wrote to all local authorities in England and Wales to inform those who may have an interest in responding.

COMMUNITIES AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Councillors: Planning

Mark Oaten: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what plans her Department has to implement the proposals set out in its recent report on Councillor Involvement in Planning Decisions in respect of biological treatment infrastructure.

Yvette Cooper: Since the report did not recommend changes to the procedure for considering planning applications, but rather pointed to existing good practice, we do not propose to take any further implementation action.

Departments: Official Hospitality

Andrew Stunell: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how much her Department has spent on hospitality in each of the last five years.

Iain Wright: For 2006-07 spending on hospitality by Communities and Local Government, I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to the hon. Member for Upper Bann (David Simpson) on 8 May 2007,  Official Report, columns 120-21W. In our predecessor department, the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, spending on hospitality was £38,803 in 2003-04, £42,126 in 2004-05 and £54,932 in 2005-06. Recorded hospitality expenditure is higher in 2006-07 than in previous years, due to coding parameter changes on the Department's financial system, which means that some catering expenditure is also included.

Departments: Training

Jacqui Lait: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what her Deprtment's expenditure was on away days located outside her Department's buildings in the last year for which figures are available.

Iain Wright: Expenditure related to staff away days is not identified as a separate item on the Department's accounting system, and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost. However, any such expenditure could reasonably be expected within the expenditure total for conferences. The total expenditure on conferences for Ministers and civil servants incurred by Communities and Local Government in the period 1 October 2006 to 30 September 2007 was £498,273.
	All expenditure on conferences is made in accordance with published departmental guidance on financial procedures and propriety.

Home Information Packs

Jacqui Lait: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for Surrey Heath of 25 June 2007,  Official Report, column 164W, on Home Information Packs, if she will place in the Library a copy of written representations made by  (a) Rightmove and  (b) Countrywide in relation to home information packs.

Yvette Cooper: Responses to public consultations from the Countrywide Assured Group plc. on the content of the home information pack and the home information pack in low demand low value areas have been placed in the Library.

Home Information Packs

Jacqui Lait: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government pursuant to the oral answer to the hon. Member for Surrey Heath of 25 June 2007,  Official Report, column 160W, on home information packs, how many voluntary home condition reports have been purchased.

Yvette Cooper: I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to the hon. Member for Brentwood and Ongar (Mr. Pickles) on 25 June 2007,  Official Report, column 160W.
	Full results of the trials that include completed transactions will be published when available.

Home Information Packs

Jacqui Lait: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government 
	(1)  how many  (a) subsidised and  (b) non-subsidised energy performance certificates have been purchased;
	(2)  how many  (a) subsidised and  (b) non-subsidised voluntary home condition reports have been purchased.

Yvette Cooper: I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to the hon. Member for Brentwood and Ongar (Mr. Pickles) on 25 June 2007,  Official Report, column 160W.
	The register of home condition reports and energy performance certificates does not include details on the price paid for a report.
	Full results of the trials that include completed transactions will be published when completed.

Home Information Packs

Eric Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government whether the sale of a freehold interest of a leasehold residential property requires  (a) an energy performance certificate and  (b) a home information pack.

Yvette Cooper: A home information pack, including an energy performance certificate, may be required where a residential property consisting of a single dwelling is marketed for sale with vacant possession, either freehold or under a long lease.

Home Information Packs

Robert Walter: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government whether buyers selling their homes through a property location agent are required to commission a home information pack; and if she will make a statement.

Yvette Cooper: holding answer 17 September 2007
	I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to the hon. Member for Beverley and Holderness (Mr. Stuart) on 9 July 2007,  Official Report, column 1273W.

Home Information Packs

Jacqui Lait: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what the legal definition is of a bedroom for the purposes of the Home Information Pack provisions.

Yvette Cooper: I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to the hon. Member for Aylesbury (Mr. Lidington) on 25 June 2007,  Official Report, column 161W.

Home Information Packs

Grant Shapps: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government if a room described as a  (a) study,  (b) spare room and  (c) HIP replacement room would be classed as a bedroom for the purposes of the requirements for three or four bedroom homes to have a home information pack.

Yvette Cooper: I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to the hon. Member for Aylesbury (Mr. Lidington) on 25 June 2007,  Official Report, column 161W.

Home Information Packs: Appeals

Grant Shapps: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what procedures are in place for a home owner to appeal against the information and grading provided in an energy performance certificate; what the estimated average cost of such a procedure is; and whether the register of energy performance certificates may be amended.

Yvette Cooper: All accreditation schemes are required to have redress procedures which are free to the consumer. Schemes have a duty to ensure assessment standards are high and that any appeals are dealt with in a fair, swift and effective manner. If an EPC was found to be inaccurate a new one would be reissued and lodged in the register.

Home Information Packs: Enforcement

Jacqui Lait: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what recent representations she has received from the Royal Institute for Chartered Surveyors on the enforceability of home information pack regulations; what response she has made; and how she plans to enforce the regulations.

Yvette Cooper: We have had a number of discussions with the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors in the last 12 months on all aspects of home information packs. Section 166 of the Housing Act 2004 places a duty on local trading standards authorities to enforce the home information pack duties in their areas.

Home Information Packs: Fines

Jacqui Lait: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what her Department's estimate is of the number of fines to be issued each year against  (a) home owners and  (b) estate agents for breaches of the home information pack provisions.

Yvette Cooper: No such estimate has been made. Local trading standards authorities are responsible for the enforcement of the home information pack duties in their areas.

Home Information Packs: Flint Bishop Solicitors

Jacqui Lait: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what meetings representatives of her Department have had with  (a) Flint Bishop solicitors and  (b) Labour Legal Services in the last 12 months; and what representations her Department has received from each organisation in relation to home information packs in that period.

Yvette Cooper: Our records show that the Department for Communities and Local Government has had no meetings with or representations from Flint Bishop solicitors or Labour Legal Services in the last 12 months on home information packs.

Home Information Packs: Liability

Grant Shapps: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what guidance her Department has produced on the  (a) minimum and  (b) maximum liability to be paid out on an insurance policy underwriting the accuracy and completeness of a personal search, in a Home Information Pack, not provided by a solicitor.

Yvette Cooper: The HIPs (No. 2) Regulations 2007 introduce, for the first time, stringent requirements for all those compiling property searches, including requirements on insurance cover for third parties and liability in the event of financial loss.
	The Procedural Guidance which supports the HIPs (No. 2) Regulations 2007 sets out that all those compiling property searches must have suitable insurance arrangements in place with an insurer authorised under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000.

Housing: Energy

Jacqui Lait: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government if she will place in the Library a copy of the XML Schema for the proposed register of energy performance certificates.

Yvette Cooper: The XML Schema for the Register of Energy Performance Certificates forms part of the Certification Scheme and Accreditation Scheme Technical Standards and is publicly available on the Department's website at:
	http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/housing/pdf/151075

Housing: Energy

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what discussions she has had with other ministerial colleagues on the provision of policy guidance for the needs of existing homes for energy improvement in any forthcoming policy papers; and if she will make a statement.

Iain Wright: The Government have a wide ranging programme to encourage energy efficiency in existing homes, through policies and programmes run by this Department, the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform. In line with appropriate practice, any policy guidance issued on energy efficiency matters will be considered collectively. Most recently, for example, Ministers from CLG, DEFRA and BERR jointly issued the Energy Measures report, guidance to local authorities which, amongst other matters, covered how local authorities can promote energy efficiency in their areas.

Housing: Floods

Nicholas Clegg: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government 
	(1)  what steps her Department is taking to encourage developers to use water resilient flooring and fittings in houses built in areas with a high risk of flooding;
	(2)  what steps her Department is taking to support the development of raised level flooring to counter the effects of flooding.

Iain Wright: On 15 May Communities and Local Government published a technical guide, "Improving the Flood Resilient Performance of New Buildings—Flood resilient construction." This guide provides information on how homes can be constructed so that, if they are flooded, it should be easier to clean and repair them and enable early reoccupation. This guide includes information on flood resilient flooring, threshold and floor levels. The Department will consider the options for further action in relation to the flood performance of buildings in the light of Sir Michael Pitts' inquiry into the effects of the summer floods.
	Meanwhile all development is subject to Planning Policy Statement 25, "Development and Flood Risk (PPS25)" which aims to locate development away from flood risk whenever possible. In those areas where virtually all land is within high flood risk areas and there are few, if any, low risk sites for development, PPS25 imposes new requirements for resilience that ensure that buildings in higher risk areas are safe and less susceptible to flood damage.
	The mitigation process described in PPS25 includes the use of resilient or resistant construction. With regard to raising floor levels, while this can assist, it is not without adverse consequences: raised floors can make access and egress more difficult, especially for older people or the infirm; placing buildings on mounds can displace flood water, causing problems elsewhere; raising buildings can create a void under the building where flood water accumulates, bringing problems of removing flood water and contaminants after the flood subsides.

Housing: Inspections

Jacqui Lait: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how many representations her Department has received on compensation payments for home inspectors and energy inspectors.

Yvette Cooper: As part of the regular correspondence from stakeholders, the Department has received some representations on the issue of compensation.

Local Authorities: Equal Pay

Tobias Ellwood: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what financial provision has been made for local authorities which are conducting pay and grading reviews in order to comply with the Equal Pay Act 1974.

John Healey: Under the Equal Pay Act 1970, an employer must provide equal pay for the same work or work which is considered objectively to be of equal value. The Local Government Association has sought additional borrowing flexibility for local government through capitalisation. In response, on 28 September 2007 the Government issued £500 million of capitalisation directions to 46 authorities for the purpose of spending on equal pay back-pay.
	A list of these 46 authorities is available at:
	http://www.communities.gov.uk/news/corporate/490459.

Religion

John Leech: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what representations the Government has received on the activities of  (a) The Friends of the Western Buddhist Order,  (b) The New Kadampa Tradition and  (c) Soka Gakkai International; and when such representations were received.

Parmjit Dhanda: Communities and Local Government has received correspondence from a member of the public regarding the alleged cultish behaviour of the Friends of the Western Buddhist Order, New Kadampa Tradition and Soka Gakkai International, and the recommendation of funding to these organisations under Round 2 of the Faith Communities Capacity Building Fund. This representation was received on 1 May 2007. As far as we are aware, no other representation has been received.

Stakeholder Advisory Panel on Home Buying and Selling: Public Appointments

Grant Shapps: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government who the members are of the Stakeholder Advisory Panel on home buying and selling; and what criteria were used to appoint its members.

Yvette Cooper: The Stakeholder Advisory Panel on home buying and selling consists of:
	Yvette Cooper (chair CLG)
	Mike Ockenden (AHIPP)
	Peter Bollon-King (NAEA)
	Nick Stace (Which?)
	Fiona Hoyle (CoPSO)
	Michael Coogan (CML)
	Simon McWhirter (WWF)
	Jeremy Leaf (RICS)
	Ted Beardsall (Land Registry)
	Paul Marsh (Law Society)
	Heather Clayton (OFT)
	David Saunders (BERR)
	Matthew Symes (Non-executive director)
	Jeremy Stanyard (Non-executive director)

Unitary Councils

Jacqui Lait: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how many councils she expects to be permitted to move ahead with a unitary bid in the initial stage following the prioritisation process outlined in the latest consultation paper on unitary bids.

John Healey: I refer the hon. Member to my statement on 25 July 2007,  Official Report, column 68WS.

HEALTH

Breast Cancer: Screening

Jon Trickett: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  what the breast cancer re-screening rate, within 36 months is in  (a) England,  (b) West Yorkshire and  (c) Wakefield;
	(2)  what proportion of eligible women in the Leeds/Wakefield breast screening area are receiving scans within the 36 month national standard.

Ann Keen: 36-month breast cancer screening interval rates for England and Leeds Wakefield and Bradford Pennine, the two screening centres which cover West Yorkshire, are shown in the following table. 38-month interval rates are also given as an indicator of how close intervals are to the national standard of 36 months. Figures are not available for Wakefield alone.
	
		
			  Percentage 
			   36 month breast cancer screening interval rate—April to June 2007  38 month breast cancer screening interval rate—April to June 2007 
			 England 67 90 
			 Bradford Pennine screening centre 69 93 
			 Leeds Wakefield screening centre 10 46 
			  Source:  NHS Cancer Screening Programme 
		
	
	The Government take the issue of the 36-month standard between screens very seriously and that is why Professor Mike Richards, the National Cancer Director, wrote to the chief executives of all 10 strategic health authorities in England on 9 February 2007 highlighting the importance of maintaining the 36-month interval.

Broomfield Hospital: PFI

Simon Burns: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many representations the Department received  (a) supporting and  (b) against the Broomfield private finance initiative scheme; what meetings were organised on this scheme and with whom; and what other consultation was conducted and what the balance of opinion was arising therefrom.

Ben Bradshaw: holding answer 8 October 2007
	 The former Minister of State (Andy Burnham), met with the hon. Members for West Chelmsford (Mr. Burns), Maldon and East Chelmsford (Mr. Whittingdale), the right hon. Member for Saffron Walden (Sir Alan Haselhurst), the hon. Member for Braintree (Mr. Newmark), Chair of the Trust David Bullock, Chief Executive of the Trust Andrew Pike, Helen Davis (from the strategic health authority (SHA)) and Peter Coates, Deputy Director of Finance-Investment, from the Department on Monday 20 November 2006 to discuss progress of the Broomfield private finance initiative scheme.
	The full business case, which is supported by local commissioners, the trust and the SHA has been submitted to the Department for approval.

Chronically Sick

Paul Truswell: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment his Department has made of the implementation of the National Service Framework for Long-term Conditions; and when the framework will be reviewed.

Ann Keen: The National Service Framework (NSF) for long-term conditions has a 10-year implementation programme from its publication in March 2005, with flexibility for organisations to set the pace of change locally to take account of local priorities and needs. The "NSF Good Practice Guide" demonstrates that that a number of organisations have successfully addressed aspects of service delivery outlined in the NSF.
	The Department has no plans to review the NSF.

Contaminated Blood and Blood Products Inquiry

Jennifer Willott: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many and what proportion of the documents rediscovered by his Department in 2007 relating to the safety of blood products have  (a) been and  (b) not been (i) publicly released and (ii) released to the Archer inquiry to date; and if he will make a statement.

Dawn Primarolo: Two sets of documents related to blood safety, previously believed to be missing, were recovered in 2006:
	some 4,500 documents located in storage in unregistered files. These are now held in 101 registered files.
	some 600 documents returned by a firm of private solicitors who acted for claimants in HIV litigation in 1989. These are now held in 20 registered files.
	These documents in 121 files are being reviewed and issued in line with the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act.
	Documents from 100 files, comprising 80 of the 101 files in category 1 and the 20 files in category 2, have been supplied to the Archer inquiry. Documents from the remaining 21 files will be issued this month, within the timetable agreed with the inquiry team.
	The documents are being scanned and placed on the Department's website for public access. So far the documents in 60 of the 101 previously unregistered files have been placed on the Department's website. It is anticipated that documents from all 121 files will be on the Department's website by the end of November.

Dental Services

Mark Harper: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will make a statement on progress towards full provision of dentistry on the NHS.

Ann Keen: The fundamental reforms introduced last year have provided for the first time a stable foundation for the national health service to develop dental services that meet local needs.
	The recent Departmental report "NHS Dental Reforms: One year on" sets out the progress already made in developing new services and the further action being taken to support the NHS in improving access. This report has been placed in the Library.

Departments: Training

Mark Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much was spent by his Department on  (a) staff training and  (b) communication training in the last 12 months.

Dawn Primarolo: This information is not held centrally and to collect it would be at disproportionate cost.

General Medical Services Contract

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health when he expects to provide NHS employers with a mandate to negotiate the arrangements for the new General Medical Services contract in 2008-08.

Ben Bradshaw: NHS employers have already begun negotiations with the British Medical Association's General Practitioners' Committee on possible changes to the General Medical Services contract for 2008-09, based on a mandate provided to them by the Department.

General Practitioners: Foreigners

Damian Green: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether his Department collects information on the number of foreign nationals in England registered with general practitioners.

Ben Bradshaw: holding answer 8 October 2007
	 The Department does not hold this information centrally.
	The Department is currently undertaking a review of access to the national health service by foreign nationals, the review is being conducted jointly with the Home Office Border and Immigration Agency and will cover access to both primary and secondary care.

Health Hazards: Electric Cables

Michael Connarty: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what advice he has received from the Health Protection Agency to the Stakeholder Advisory Group on ELF EMF's report; if he will place a copy of the advice in the Library; and if he will make a statement.

Dawn Primarolo: Following the publication of the Stakeholder Advisory Group on extremely low frequency and electromagnetic fields (SAGE) report, the former Minister of State (Caroline Flint) at the time, wrote to the Health Protection Agency to ask for its considered view and advice to Government. We are currently awaiting a reply.

Health Hazards: Mercury

Tim Farron: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment his Department has made of the potential effect on public health of mercury in  (a) vaccinations,  (b) dental amalgams and  (c) low energy light bulbs.

Dawn Primarolo: As with all medicinal products, vaccine safety is continually monitored by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) with advice from the Commission on Human Medicines (CHM). The CHM has thoroughly reviewed the safety of vaccines containing mercury (thiomersal).
	Several large studies have found no evidence of a link between thiomersal-containing vaccines and neurodevelopmental disorders. MHRA and CHM advice, available on the MHRA website, is that there is no evidence of harm from the very small quantities of thiomersal contained in some vaccines, with the exception of possible allergic reactions such as skin rashes or local swelling at the site of injection. This view concurs with that of the World Health Organisation, the United States Institute of Medicine and the European Medicines Agency.
	The use of dental amalgam is declining in the United Kingdom as a result of increased application of alternatives, changes in the commissioning of primary dental care and a general improvement in dental health. We expect this decline to continue. However it remains an effective direct restorative option and there is no evidence to suggest that its use poses any significant health risk.
	No formal assessment has been made in respect of the potential effect on public health of mercury in low energy light bulbs.

Health Services: Per Capita Costs

James Clappison: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much was spent per head of population on health services in 2006-07 in each  (a) primary care trust and  (b) local authority area ranked in order.

Ben Bradshaw: Tables showing the spend by head of population in primary care trusts for 2006-07 and social services spending in 2005-06 for each council in ranked order have been placed in the Library. These are for the latest years for which data are available.

Injuries: Offensive Weapons

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many  (a) gun shot and  (b) knife wounds the NHS has treated in the last 12 months.

Ben Bradshaw: Information is not collected on the number of gun shot and knife wounds the national health service has treated.
	Information is available however on those patients who were actually admitted to hospital for gun shot and knife injuries (these figures do not include patients who were treated in accident and emergency departments for gun shot/knife injuries and not admitted). Those cause codes that appear relevant are presented in the following table.
	
		
			  Count of finished admission episodes for gun shot and knife wound injuries 2005-06: NHS hospitals, England 
			Count 
			 W32 Handgun discharge 44 
			 W33 Rifle shotgun and larger firearm discharge 73 
			 X72 Intentional self-harm by handgun discharge 10 
			 X73 Intent self-harm by rifle shotgun and larger firearm discharge 17 
			 X93 Assault by handgun discharge 44 
			 X94 Assault by rifle shotgun and larger firearm discharge 51 
			 Y22 Handgun discharge undetermined intent 9 
			 Y23 Rifle shotgun and larger firearm discharge undetermined intent 11 
			  Total 259 
			
			 W26 Contact with knife sword or dagger 5,321 
			  Notes: 1. Finished admission episodes.: A finished admission episode is the first period of in-patient care under one consultant within one health care provider. Please note that admissions do not represent the number of in-patients, as a person may have more than one admission within the year. 2. Cause code: The cause code is a supplementary code that indicates the nature of any external cause of injury, poisoning or other adverse effects. 3. Ungrossed data: Figures have not been adjusted for shortfalls in data (i.e. the data are ungrossed). Source: Hospital Episode Statistics, The Information Centre for health and social care

Members: Correspondence

John Baron: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will address each of the seven questions asked by the hon. Member for Billericay in the letter to his Department on the subject of testosterone deficiency dated 31 May.

Ann Keen: A response to this letter was sent to the hon. Member on 19 July 2007. This reply answers all the hon. Member's questions and there is nothing further we can add to this response.

NHS Next Stage Review

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  what his most recent estimate is of the  (a) cost to date (i) in total and (ii) broken down by major cost area and  (b) expected overall cost to the public purse of Lord Darzi's NHS Next Stage Review;
	(2)  what progress Lord Darzi is making in his NHS Next Stage Review; how many  (a) clinicians,  (b) managers and  (c) other staff he has received representations from; how many NHS organisations the review team has formally met with since the announcement of the review; whether he still intends to publish an interim report of the work of the review in October; and if he will make a statement;
	(3)  how many clinical pathway groups to inform the work of the NHS Next Stage Review have been established in each strategic health authority; and who the members are of each group which has been established.

Ann Keen: The interim report, published on 4 October, explains that the review is primarily a local process involving thousands of frontline staff, patients and public in the design of care pathways based on best practice evidence. This is core business for the national health service and as such involves no additional cost to the taxpayer.
	The success of a review like this depends of course on the thorough involvement of patients, public and staff and good communication. The total departmental spend so far on staff, patients and public engagement in direct connection with the review is £1.2 million.
	The clinicians, managers and other staff leading the review work locally are receiving the great majority of representations from clinicians, managers and other staff.
	Lord Darzi personally has met with over 1,500 NHS staff in 17 NHS organisations, read more than 1,400 letters and e-mails from people, including NHS staff, from up and down the country and participated in a nationwide day of detailed discussions with 1,000 people including NHS staff from nine towns and cities. An event attended by representatives of 250 stakeholder groups has been held. In addition, officials at the Department of Health regularly meet with representatives from NHS organisations on various issues right across the span of the review.
	Each strategic health authority is responsible for establishing eight local clinical pathway groups. Lists of members should be sought directly from the strategic health authorities themselves.

NHS: ICT

Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the answer of 12 June 2007,  Official Report, column 1004W, on NHS: ICT, when the plan of key milestones will be completed; and how it will be made publicly available.

Ben Bradshaw: I refer the hon. Member to the answer given on 25 June 2007,  Official Report, column 270W.

Skin Cancer: Medical Treatments

Si�n James: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what estimate he has made of the cost to the NHS of treating skin cancer in each year since 1997; and if he will make a statement.

Ann Keen: I refer the hon. Member to the answer given on 22 January 2007,  Official Report, columns 1605-06W.

FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS

British Overseas Territories

Andrew MacKinlay: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether the UK's obligations under the UN Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women have been extended to all UK overseas territories; and if he will make a statement.

Meg Munn: The Government are working to encourage the extension of the UK's obligation under the UN Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women to all the UK populated Overseas Territories. With the agreement of the respective territory governments, we have extended this convention to the British Virgin Islands, the Falkland Islands and the Turks and Caicos Islands.
	The Cayman Islands Government have formally requested that the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women should be extended to them. Further legislative work is ongoing and will need to be completed before the Convention can be extended. The Governments of Bermuda and Gibraltar have also agreed to draft legislation to enable the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women to be extended to them.
	We will continue to encourage those UK Overseas Territories that have not yet agreed to the extension of the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women to do so.

Departments: European Indicators Project

Gisela Stuart: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what steps his Department is taking to ensure full participation in the European Indicators Project by official bodies and UK assessment organisations.

Jim Murphy: I refer my hon. Friend to the reply my hon. Friend the Minister for Schools and Learners, Jim Knight, gave to her on 8 October 2007,  Official Report, columns 382-83W.

Entry Clearances

Stephen Williams: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what percentage of appeals against a refusal to issue a visa were upheld in the last 12 months, broken down by overseas post.

Kim Howells: I refer the hon. Member to the following table.
	
		
			  Appeals received, dismissed and allowed in 2006-07 
			  Post  Appeals received  Appeals dismissed  Appeals allowed  Percentage allowed( 1) 
			 Abu Dhabi 70 25 20 44 
			 Abuja 3,895 3,040 1,105 27 
			 Accra 4,370 4,650 1,680 27 
			 Addis Ababa 1,205 1,500 530 26 
			 Algiers 115 25 5 17 
			 Almaty 25 10 5 33 
			 Amman 485 220 115 34 
			 Amsterdam 65 55 15 21 
			 Ankara 355 170 205 55 
			 Ashgabat 60 25 15 38 
			 Asmara 40 50 45 47 
			 Athens 15 20 15 43 
			 Bahrain 40 5 5 50 
			 Baku 25 10 0 0 
			 Bandar Seri Begawan 5 5 0 0 
			 Bangkok 645 270 280 51 
			 Banjul 430 250 90 26 
			 Beijing 280 220 125 36 
			 Beirut 165 95 35 27 
			 Belgrade 65 35 25 42 
			 Bogota 310 165 75 31 
			 Bratislava 0 45 0 0 
			 Bridgetown 45 30 5 14 
			 Brussels 60 20 5 20 
			 Bucharest 315 265 140 35 
			 Budapest 0 5 0 0 
			 Cairo 235 105 75 42 
			 Canberra 125 10 5 33 
			 Caracas 30 15 5 25 
			 Casablanca 175 65 85 57 
			 Chennai 1,580 520 335 39 
			 Chicago 125 60 15 20 
			 Chisinau 60 20 50 71 
			 Chongqing 80 20 35 64 
			 Colombo 1,275 850 870 51 
			 Copenhagen 45 50 15 23 
			 Dakar 25 30 10 25 
			 Damascus 50 80 45 36 
			 Dar Es Salaam 190 140 65 32 
			 Dhaka 9,285 4,455 4,255 49 
			 Doha 10 10 5 33 
			 Dubai 265 100 50 33 
			 Dublin 100 55 15 21 
			 Dusseldorf 100 85 30 26 
			 Freetown 360 195 110 36 
			 Gaborone 25 25 10 29 
			 Geneva 0 0 0  
			 Georgetown 55 25 20 44 
			 Guangzhou 610 215 350 62 
			 Hanoi 55 30 25 45 
			 Harare 2,115 1,375 615 31 
			 Havana 0 0 0  
			 Helsinki 30 5 5 50 
			 Hong Kong 105 85 45 35 
			 Islamabad 32,740 13,070 13,910 52 
			 Istanbul 465 270 280 51 
			 Jakarta 90 55 40 42 
			 Jedda 95 70 55 44 
			 Jerusalem 5 15 5 25 
			 Kampala 895 585 365 38 
			 Karachi 3,050 655 820 56 
			 Kathmandu 940 260 185 42 
			 Khartoum 95 35 20 36 
			 Kiev 325 165 145 47 
			 Kingston 2,635 1,670 1,580 49 
			 Kinshasa 280 160 60 27 
			 Kolkata 125 35 20 36 
			 Kuala Lumpur 215 135 60 31 
			 Kuwait City 70 50 15 23 
			 La Paz 5 0 0  
			 Lagos 24,290 4,985 6,165 55 
			 Lilongwe 705 175 45 20 
			 Lima 10 15 10 40 
			 Lisbon 0 5 0 0 
			 Los Angeles 145 25 20 44 
			 Luanda 45 15 10 40 
			 Lusaka 215 105 40 28 
			 Madrid 100 50 15 23 
			 Manila 2,050 1,210 925 43 
			 Mexico City 5 0 0  
			 Minsk 45 15 15 50 
			 Montevideo 0 0 0  
			 Moscow 75 60 60 50 
			 Mumbai 8,635 3,390 3,115 48 
			 Muscat 35 15 10 40 
			 Nairobi 855 625 410 40 
			 New Delhi 11,745 4,680 7,170 61 
			 New York 270 155 60 28 
			 Nicosia 195 70 35 33 
			 Oslo 15 5 10 67 
			 Ottawa 230 40 10 20 
			 Panama City 0 0 0  
			 Paris 45 40 10 20 
			 Port Louis 290 145 105 42 
			 Port of Spain 40 15 10 40 
			 Prague 0 5 5 50 
			 Pretoria 1,610 765 190 20 
			 Quito 55 30 20 40 
			 Rabat 340 135 175 56 
			 Rangoon 20 30 20 40 
			 Riga 5 5 0 0 
			 Rio De Janeiro 845 315 95 23 
			 Riyadh 35 40 30 43 
			 Rome 55 25 20 44 
			 Sanaa 250 175 95 35 
			 Santo Domingo 30 0 5 100 
			 Sarajevo 10 5 5 50 
			 Seoul 160 40 20 33 
			 Shanghai 90 45 45 50 
			 Singapore 70 35 15 30 
			 Skopje 445 225 145 39 
			 Sofia 140 400 125 24 
			 St. Petersburg 5 5 5 50 
			 Stockholm 75 50 25 33 
			 Suva 15 0 10 100 
			 Tallinn 0 5 0 0 
			 Tashkent 10 0 10 100 
			 Tbilisi 20 15 10 40 
			 Tehran 1,810 980 520 35 
			 Tel Aviv 60 25 0 0 
			 Tirana 450 295 115 28 
			 Tokyo 20 30 15 33 
			 Tripoli 70 65 15 19 
			 Tunis 475 345 255 43 
			 Ulaanbaatar 35 5 5 50 
			 Valletta 5 0 0  
			 Victoria 20 5 10 67 
			 Vienna 10 10 0 0 
			 Vilnius 0 0 0  
			 Warsaw 15 0 0  
			 Wellington 5 5 5 50 
			 Windhoek 0 15 0 0 
			 Yaounde 535 295 175 37 
			 Yekaterinburg 25 10 5 33 
			 Yerevan 5 5 10 67 
			 Zagreb 10 5 0 0 
			 Grand total 130,100 57,350 49,695 46 
			 (1 )Percentage allowed is calculated by the number of appeals allowed, divided by the number of appeals resolved (dismissed plus allowed).  Note: Due to the length of the appeal process the total number of appeals allowed and dismissed does not equal the total received in any given year.  Source: 2006-07 Provisional Entry Clearance Statistics (to be published)

Northern Cyprus: Churches

Rudi Vis: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the condition of Greek Cypriot churches and cemeteries in northern Cyprus.

Jim Murphy: Pending reunification, preserving the cultural heritage of Cyprus, including churches and cemeteries in northern Cyprus, remains an issue of great importance. More can and should be done in this regard, and I sympathise with all those affected. The UN, and also the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, are aware of this issue and we support them in their efforts to address the problem. The process envisaged by the 8 July Agreement would provide a framework in which the issue of preserving cultural heritage could be discussed and addressed by the two communities.

Serbia: International Whaling Commission

Tom Brake: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussions he had with the Serbian Foreign Minister in London on 18 September on Serbia's possible membership of the International Whaling Commission; and if he will make a statement.

Meg Munn: Although my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary's meeting with the Serbian Foreign Minister covered a range of international issues, whaling was not discussed.

Uganda: Elections

Michael Moore: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what assessment he has made of the recommendations of the European Union Elections Observer Mission report on the 2006 elections in Uganda; what discussions he has had with his European counterparts on this report; what proposals he has made on this subject to his European counterparts ahead of the December EU-Africa summit; and if he will make a statement.

David Miliband: In July 2006, the EU election observer mission released its final report on the February 2006 elections. The report concluded that the elections fell short of full compliance with international principles for genuine democratic elections. However, the report also said that despite some shortcomings on election day, voting was generally well administered, transparent and competitive.
	The UK, along with our EU partners, has a regular dialogue with the Government of Uganda on all aspects of developing multi-party democracy and engaging with the opposition, building towards the next elections, due to take place in 2011.
	The report and recommendations were discussed in detail by EU Heads of Mission in Kampala, including with the Government of Uganda. We will continue to refer to it regularly in the run-up to the next elections. I have not had discussions on this issue with my EU counterparts. The agenda of the December EU-Africa summit has not been finalised. However, the UK supports the inclusion of a discussion of governance throughout Africa.

USA: Prince Charles

Andrew MacKinlay: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether before Sir Michael Peat's press conference on 26 June his Department was aware that the official gift given during the official visit to the USA in 2005 by His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales to President Bush had been selected and purchased by Michael Fawcett; and if he will make a statement.

Jim Murphy: I refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave him on 26 July 2006,  Official Report, column 1473W.

USA: Prince Charles

Andrew MacKinlay: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs pursuant to the answer of 16 April 2007,  Official Report, columns 49-50W, on the USA: Prince Charles, and with reference to the letter subsequently sent to the hon. Member for Thurrock on 16 May 2007, how much of the cost of gifts was spent purchasing the Churchill Book presented by His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales as an official present to President Bush; whether the reimbursement for its purchase was paid from the public purse to Premier Mode, Michael Fawcett, a consultant or His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales's Household; and if he will make a statement.

Jim Murphy: None of the cost of the official gift to President Bush was included in the cost of gifts in the letter of 16 May to my hon. Friend from my right hon. Friend the then Foreign Secretary (Margaret Beckett). The letter contained details of the cost of gifts presented by their Royal Highnesses the Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall during the visit to the USA in January 2007. The official gift of a book written by Sir Winston Churchill was presented to President Bush during the visit in November 2005. The book was purchased by the Household of His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales. In line with normal practice the cost was reimbursed by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office as sponsoring Department.

USA: Prince Charles

Andrew MacKinlay: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales's Household was consulted in preparing the answer given to the hon. Member for Thurrock on 17 November 2005,  Official Report, column 1491W, on the United States (Prince of Wales's Visit); and if he will make a statement.

Jim Murphy: Yes; it is our normal practice to consult all stakeholders when answering parliamentary questions.

USA: Prince Charles

Andrew MacKinlay: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs on what basis Michael Fawcett was authorised to select and purchase the official gift given by His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales to President Bush during his official visit to the USA in 2005; and when Mr Fawcett's role in this task became known to his Department.

Jim Murphy: Gifts are selected by the Royal Household under guidelines set by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. The first reference to Michael Fawcett in this context was in my hon. Friend's parliamentary question (UIN 26865) that was answered by my right hon. Friend the then Foreign Secretary (Mr. Straw) on 17 November 2005,  Official Report, column 1492W.

Yemen

Keith Vaz: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when he next plans to meet  (a) the President and  (b) the Prime Minister of Yemen.

Kim Howells: Foreign engagements for my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary and other Ministers are kept under constant review. It is not our practice to announce such visits until they are firm. Because of the unpredictable nature of world events, final decisions on overseas visits are often not possible until very shortly before the day of travel. Our relationship with Yemen is, of course, a very important one for the Government.

PRIME MINISTER

Armed Conflict: Terrorism

Harry Cohen: To ask the Prime Minister if he will make it his policy to take advice from the security services on the likely effect on the incidence of terrorist events of any future UK military campaign prior to undertaking such a campaign.

Gordon Brown: Before committing to military action I would, of course, expect to take advice from all relevant bodies.

Cabinet Committee on Animal Terrorism

Jacqui Lait: To ask the Prime Minister why he has ended the work of the Cabinet Committee on animal terrorism.

Gordon Brown: The Government remain fully committed to tackling animal rights extremism. On 23 July 2007,  Official Report, column 46WS, I announced a new Cabinet Committee structure copies of which are available in the Libraries of the House. There are now a smaller number of broader ranging, more cross-cutting Committees. Under the new structure, the new Domestic Affairs (Justice and Crime) sub-Committee will be responsible for reviewing progress in tackling animal rights extremism.

Chequers: Official Hospitality

Mark Hoban: To ask the Prime Minister when he expects to publish the list of guests who were entertained at Chequers in 2006-07.

Gordon Brown: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave my hon. Friend the Member for Ochil and South Perthshire (Gordon Banks) on 25 July 2007,  Official Report, column 1110W.

Departments: Ministerial Policy Advisers

Richard Spring: To ask the Prime Minister 
	(1)  whether Chris Leslie holds a position remunerated from the public purse; and if he will make a statement;
	(2)  whether Wilf Stephenson holds a position remunerated by the public purse; and if he will make a statement;
	(3)  whether Deborah Mattinson holds a position remunerated by the public purse; and if he will make a statement.

Gordon Brown: No.

Departments: Ministerial Policy Advisers

Mark Hoban: To ask the Prime Minister pursuant to the answer of 10 July 2007,  Official Report, column 1467W, if he will place in the Library a copy of the job description of his adviser on political press issues.

Gordon Brown: I have nothing further to add to the answer I gave the hon. Member on 10 July 2007,  Official Report, column 1467W.

Departments: Official Hospitality

Mark Hoban: To ask the Prime Minister which guests he has entertained at  (a) No. 10 Downing street and  (b) Chequers since 27 June 2007.

Gordon Brown: I refer the hon. Member to the press briefing given by my spokesman on 26 July 2007. A transcript of this is available on the No. 10 website: http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page12687.asp, and a copy has been placed in the Library of the House.

Departments: Press

Mark Hoban: To ask the Prime Minister 
	(1)  to which periodicals his Office subscribes;
	(2)  how much was spent by his Office on newspapers and magazines in the last 12 months;
	(3)  what magazines, newspapers and periodicals No. 10 Downing street and his Offices subscribed to  (a) before and  (b) since 27 June.

Gordon Brown: I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to him by my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary for the Cabinet Office (Gillian Merron) on 9 October 2007 (153289, 153290, 153530).

Departments: Redundancy Pay

Mark Hoban: To ask the Prime Minister how much was spent by his Office on redundancy payments in the last 12 months.

Gordon Brown: I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to him by my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary for the Cabinet Office (Gillian Merron) on 9 October 2007 (153283).

Departments: Travel

Mark Hoban: To ask the Prime Minister how much was spent by his Office on first class train tickets in the last 12 months.

Gordon Brown: I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to him by my right hon. Friend the Minister for the Cabinet Office (Edward Miliband) on 8 October 2007,  Official Report, column 3W.

Departments: Travel

Mark Hoban: To ask the Prime Minister how much was spent by his Office on  (a) first class and  (b) business class flights in the last 12 months.

Gordon Brown: I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to him by my right hon. Friend the Minister for the Cabinet Office (Edward Miliband) on 8 October 2007 (153286).

Departments: Tribunals

Mark Hoban: To ask the Prime Minister how much was spent by his Office on industrial tribunals in the last 12 months.

Gordon Brown: I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to him by my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary for the Cabinet Office (Gillian Merron) on 9 October 2007 (153288).

Iraq: Weapons

Harry Cohen: To ask the Prime Minister what source of information was cited in intelligence reports to the Government immediately before the decision to go to war with Iraq in March 2003 and subsequently refuted as a reliable source of information; what assessment he has made of whether this source of information existed; whether this source was a case of the UK intelligence service being misled; what the nature was of the subsequent inquiries which led to the refutation of this source of information; and if he will make a statement.

Gordon Brown: These matters have been examined during the course of the Butler Review and other inquiries, and covered during debates and statements on Iraq and in briefings by my predecessor's official spokesman. All relevant information has been placed in the public domain in as far as that could be done without prejudicing national security.

Legislation: Queen Elizabeth II

Robert Wilson: To ask the Prime Minister what procedures were followed in relation to informing the Queen about the announcement of the draft legislative programme.

Gordon Brown: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave him on 23 July 2007,  Official Report, column 721W.

Official Residences

Norman Baker: To ask the Prime Minister what the total cost to public funds has been of entertainment at  (a) Chequers,  (b) Chevening and  (c) Dorneywood since 1 May 1997.

Gordon Brown: For information on entertainment costs at Chequers for the financial year 2006-07 I refer the hon. Member to my answer on 25 July 2007,  Official Report, column 1108W. For information prior to this date I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my predecessor, the right hon. Tony Blair, on 11 October 2006,  Official Report, column 794W.
	Responsibility for Chevening is a matter for the Foreign Office. In respect of Dorneywood, I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by the then Parliamentary Secretary at the then Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (Chris Leslie) on 28 March 2003,  Official Report, column 484W. Since my right hon. Friend the former Deputy Prime Minister (Mr. Prescott) relinquished the use of Dorneywood, any costs associated with official use have fallen to the relevant Department.

Parliamentary Private Secretaries: Finance

Theresa May: To ask the Prime Minister what the total estimated annual cost is of  (a) expenses,  (b) salary,  (c) office space and  (d) administrative support for his new Parliamentary Private Secretary.

Gordon Brown: Parliamentary Private Secretaries are appointed in accordance with the requirements of the Ministerial Code. They do not receive salaries or expenses.

Tony Blair: Security

Daniel Rogerson: To ask the Prime Minister 
	(1)  what discussions he has had with the Quartet on security arrangements for the former right hon. Member for Sedgefield in his role as Special Envoy to the Middle East;
	(2)  what the cost has been to the public purse of providing security protection for the former right hon. Member for Sedgefield since he left office;
	(3)  what estimate he has made of the likely cost to the public purse of security protection for Mr. Blair in 2007-08.

Gordon Brown: It has been the practice of successive Governments not to comment on security matters.

Yemen

Keith Vaz: To ask the Prime Minister when he next plans to meet the President of Yemen.

Gordon Brown: I have no current plans to do so.